Kerala High Court
The Kerala Land Development ... vs Manoj.K on 30 September, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
Monday, the 30th day of September 2024 / 8th Aswina, 1946
WA NO. 961 OF 2024
AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 15.03.2024 IN WP(C) 2682/2024 OF THIS COURT
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENT 1 & 2:
1. THE KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,MUSEUM BAINS
COMPOUND, KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 695003
AND ANOTHER.
BY STANDING COUNSEL, KABANI DINESH M.
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:
1. MANOJ.K, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAMOORTHY, MADHAVI MANDHIRAM,
THENARI P.O, ELAPPULLY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678622
AND 2 OTHERS.
ADV.JACOB SEBASTIAN FOR R1
GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR ADDL R2
Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the
circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum, the High Court be pleased
to stay the operation and implementation of the judgment dated 15.3.2024
in W.P(C) No.2682 of 2024 pending disposal of the appeal.
This writ appeal again coming on for orders on 30.9.2024 upon
perusing the appeal memorandum and this court's order dated 6/9/2024, the
court on the same day passed the following:
NITIN JAMDAR C.J.
&
S.MANU, J.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Writ Appeal No.961 of 2024
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of September, 2024
ORDER
NITIN JAMDAR C.J.
Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant Adv.Kabani Dinesh and
Adv.Jacob Sebastian for Respondent No.1.
2. The Appellant had challenged the order passed by the learned
Single Judge directing the Appellant Corporation to consider the claim
of the Writ Petitioner Respondent and take necessary action within a
period of three months. Necessary action would be payment of a
monetary claim to the Respondent Writ Petitioner.
3. The Respondent Writ Petitioner had filed a writ petition earlier in
this Court in the year 2015, which was disposed of by the learned Single
Judge on 24 February 2021, directing the Appellant to pay the amounts
due to the Petitioner without further delay after taking requisite steps.
4. The Petitioner's grievances is in respect of one pond. The
appellant had taken an objection that the Petitioner unauthorisedly
carried out the work hence, the Petitioner is not entitled to any amount
as directed. According to the Appellant, fraud was committed by an
Officer, which led to the Respondent instituting a vigilance enquiry.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant seeks time to place on record
communication issued to the Petitioner drawing attention to the fact of
the non-construction of the pond. The Appellant will also produce
necessary documents regarding the vigilance case for the perusal of the
court. The additional documents be placed on record on the next
posting date.
5. Interim order will continue till the next posting date.
Post on 16 October 2024. sd/
NITIN JAMDAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
sd/
S.MANU
JUDGE
jm/
30-09-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
