Jacob Kallummoodan vs Kollam Municipal Corporation
2024 Latest Caselaw 4638 Ker

Kerala High Court

Jacob Kallummoodan vs Kollam Municipal Corporation on 6 February, 2024

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
     TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 3883 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:

    1     JACOB KALLUMMOODAN
          AGED 63 YEARS
          S/O. JOSEPH, JOY VILLA,
          SAKTHIKULANGARA,KOLLAM, PIN - 691581

    2     ROY JOSEPH
          AGED 54 YEARS
          S/O. CHARLY JOSEPH, THOTTATHIL VEEDU,
          SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691581

          BY ADV R.SATISH KUMAR



RESPONDENTS:

    1     KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
          CORPORATION OFFICE, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, KOLLAM,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 691001

    2     THE SECRETARY
          KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.. CORPORATION OFFICE,
          NEAR RAILWAY STATION KOLLAM, PIN - 691001

          BY ADV.SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM), SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)NO.3883/2024                     2




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 06th day of February, 2024

Petitioners have approached this Court seeking a

direction to the second respondent to consider and pass

orders on Ext.P1 representation after affording an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioners.

2. The specific grievance raised by the petitioners is

that the property of the petitioners was acquired for

implementation of Integrated Development of Small and

Medium Town (IDSMT) Scheme. Petitioners submit that

the Scheme has not been implemented and they have

abandoned the Scheme and that the petitioners' property

has not been returned back, but in respect of others,

properties acquired have been returned back. Aggrieved by

the same, the petitioners have preferred Ext.P1

representation before the second respondent requesting to

return back the property.

3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the

respondents.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents,

upon instructions, submitted that a decision on Ext.P1 will

be taken within a period of one month after affording an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioners.

5. In view of the above, there will be a direction to

the respondents to take up Ext.P1 and dispose of the same

within an outer limit of one month from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of

being heard to the petitioners.

Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions.

Sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE csl

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3883/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15-01-2024 WITH EXHIBITS

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 19-01-2024