Shivarama B.S vs The Commissioner Of Land Revenue, Tvm
2024 Latest Caselaw 16758 Ker

Kerala High Court

Shivarama B.S vs The Commissioner Of Land Revenue, Tvm on 12 June, 2024

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM

         WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1946

                            WP(C) NO. 26250 OF 2017

PETITIONER/S:

             SHIVARAMA B.S.
             AGED 48 YEARS
             S/O.B.M.SUBRAMANYA BHAT,KUMARANILAYA,BELA VILLAGE,KASARGODE.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER
             SMT.AMY DENNY
             SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA



RESPONDENT/S:

     1       THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,
             OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,
             PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING,MUSEUM JUNCTION,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695O33.

     2       ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
             OFFICE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
             CIVIL STATION,KASARGODE-671 121.


OTHER PRESENT:

             SMT.K.B.SONY-GP




      THIS   WRIT   PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON

12.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)NO.26250 of 2017

                                   2




                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner's application for renewal of Arms licence was

rejected by Ext.P1 order dated 23.01.2015. Challenging Ext.P1

order, the petitioner had filed Ext.P3 Appeal with Ext.P3(a)

Petition to condone the delay before the first respondent.

2. The appeal was rejected as per Ext.P4 order dated

03.07.2017 holding that there is no reasonable explanation for

the delay. The contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P4 order

was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner.

In view of the said submission, Ext.P4 order is set aside and

the first respondent is directed to reconsider Ext.P3 and

Ext.P3(a), after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner

in accordance with law within a period of three months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE

Shg/x W.P.(C)NO.26250 of 2017

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26250/2017

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.1.2015

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL PRESCRIPTION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER DATED 27.9.2009

EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL PRESCRIPTION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER DATED 24.9.2015

EXHIBIT P2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE LAB REPORT DATED 22.9.2015

EXHIBIT P2(C) TRUE COPY OF THE LAB REPORT DATED 24.9.2015

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.2.2017

EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.2.2017

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 3.7.2017.