Kerala High Court
Annie vs The Cochin International Airport Ltd on 3 April, 2024
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13315 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ANNIE
AGED 73 YEARS, W/O LATE KUTTAPAN NAIR,
ERALIL (H), ATHANI P.O., NEDUMBASSERY, KOCHI,
PIN - 683 585.
BY ADVS.
R.SANJITH
C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOCHI,
PIN - 683 111.
2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD,
KOCHI AIRPORT.P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 111.
3 K.M. MATHAI
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
KAPATTUKUDI, KOMBANADU, PERUMBAVOOR P.O,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 545.
4 THE TAXI OPERATORS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD,
NEDUMBASSERRY, KOCHI AIRPORT P.O, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683 111.
BY ADV. SRI. P. BENNY THOMAS -SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13315/2024
-:2:-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to be the legal heir of late Kuttappan
Nair. According to the petitioner, the property belonging to late
Kuttappan Nair was acquired for the purposes of the Cochin
International Airport. According to the petitioner,
late Kuttappan Nair was entitled to a taxi permit for operating
taxis from the Cochin International Airport in terms of the policy
of granting taxi permits to persons whose land had been
acquired for the purposes of the airport, but no taxi permit was
however granted to late Kuttappan Nair and presently the
petitioner, being the sole legal heir of late Kuttappan Nair, is
entitled to a taxi permit. It is also the case of the petitioner that
the 3rd respondent obtained the taxi permit due to
late Kuttappan Nair by misrepresenting himself. The petitioner
has preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 2 nd respondent
and prays that a direction may be issued to the 2 nd respondent to
consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation within the
shortest possible time.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2,
I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of
without notice to respondent Nos.3 and 4, considering the
limited nature of reliefs sought for by the petitioner.
Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of
directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on
Ext.P4 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner
as also to the 3rd respondent and to any other person, who may
be interested in the matter within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
ats JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13315/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAC BEARING NO. 95/95
DATED 26/07/1999
Exhibit P1(a) TYPED AND CLEAR COPY OF THE EXHIBIT P1
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE
ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT,
ANNAMMANADA GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED
12/01/2022
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELATIONSHIP
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KALLOR
THEKKUMURI VILLAGE OFFICE DATED
30/11/2023
Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE FAMILY MEMBERSHIP
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KALLOR
THEKKUMURI VILLAGE OFFICE DATED
30/11/2023
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
13/03/24 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.
(C).NO. 28481 OF 2018
