Kerala High Court
Lisha Ashok vs The District Collector on 12 November, 2024
Author: V.G.Arun
Bench: V.G.Arun
2024:KER:84711
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
LISHA ASHOK
AGED 49 YEARS
W/O. ASHOK KUMAR K.P PULIPARAYIL VEEDU
KULASEKHARAMANGALAM POST VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT., PIN - 686608
BY ADVS.
GEEN T.MATHEW
K.S.GOPI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
[APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 13(6) OF THE
KERALA BUILDINGS (LEASE AND RENT CONTROL) ACT,
1965] DISTRICT COLLECTORATE CIVIL STATION BUILDING,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686002
2 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL)
DISTRICT COLLECTORATE CIVIL STATION BUILDING,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686002
3 THE TAHASILDAR
[ACCOMMODATION CONTROLLER UNDER SECTION 13(1) OF
THE KERALA BUILDINGS (LEASE AND RENT CONTROL) ACT,
1965] TALUK OFFICE, VAIKOM MINI CIVIL STATION,
VAIKOM POST-KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686141
2024:KER:84711
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
2
4 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER
ELECTRICAL SECTION KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
LTD ELECTRICAL DIVISION, VAIKOM CHEMBU, VAIKOM
POST- KOTTAYAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686141
5 SASIDHARAN
S/O. CHAKRAPANI SOUPARNIKA KULASEKHARAMANGALAM
POST- KULASEKHARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686608
6 SREESANKAR
AGED 15 YEARS
S/O. SREELATHA SOUPARNIKA KULASEKHARAMANGALAM POST-
KULASEKHARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN AND MOTHER
SREELATHA W/O. SASIDHARAN SOUPARNIKA
KULASEKHARAMANGALAM POST - KULASEKHARAMANGALAM
VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT., PIN -
686608
BY SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR. GP.
SRI. NIRMAL.S SC FOR KSEB.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:84711
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is running a financial institution in the
premises leased out to her by the 5 th respondent. A petition for
eviction filed by the 5th respondent is pending before the Rent
Control Court, Vaikom. The premises leased to the petitioner is
a shop room having an electrical connection bearing consumer
No.114644900448. The electricity meter for the said connection
is in another room, which is under the lock and key of the 5 th
respondent.
2. The petitioner alleges that during the pendency
of the rent control proceedings, the 5th respondent intentionally
damaged the power supply to her shop room, in an attempt to
compel her to vacate the premises. Thereupon, the petitioner
preferred a complaint before the 4th respondent and since the 4th
respondent was unable to restore the connection, approached
the 3rd respondent Accommodation Controller. The petition filed
before the 3rd respondent having been rejected by Ext.P1, an
appeal was preferred before the 1st respondent. By Ext.P3, the
2024:KER:84711
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
2nd respondent informed that the appeal cannot be entertained.
Aggrieved, this Writ Petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the only reason for rejecting the petitioner's appeal is the
pendency of proceedings before the courts. It is pointed out that
one such proceeding is a matrimonial appeal arising out of the
Original Petition filed by the first wife of the 5 th respondent -
landlord. The said proceedings has nothing to do with the
petitioner's tenancy and, as such, cannot be projected as a
reason for not considering the petitioner's request for re-
connection of electricity. The pendency of proceedings before the
Rent Control Court cannot be projected as a reason for refusing
to decide the appeal on merits.
4. Heard, learned Government Pleader, and the
learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board
also.
5. By issuing Ext.P3 communication, the 2nd
respondent has informed that the petitioner's appeal will not be
entertained on merits. When an appeal is preferred under
2024:KER:84711
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
Section 13(6) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease And Rent Control)
Act, 1965, the 1st respondent is statutorily bound to decide the
appeal on merits. As such, Ext.P3, issued by a Subordinate
Officer, who is not the Appellate Authority, is of no value.
6. In the nature of the order I propose to pass,
notice to respondents 5 and 6 is dispensed with.
The Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the 1st
respondent to pass a reasoned order on Ext.P2 appeal,
uninfluenced by the observations in Ext.P3 communication.
While deciding the appeal, the 1st respondent shall take into
consideration the petitioner's contention that the pendency of a
Matrimonial Appeal between the landlord and his first wife or the
rent control proceedings are not reasons for denying the
amenities of the tenant. The order shall be passed, after hearing
the landlord also, preferably within a period of two months.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
SPV
2024:KER:84711
WP(C) NO. 39895 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39895/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B6-3508/2023
DATED 30.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE 3 RD
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL
NO.DCKTM/10767/2023-H1 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1 ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.DCKTM/10767/2023-H1 DATED 06.10.2024
ISSUED BY THE 2 ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
