High Court Kerala High Court

Smt.Anna Mathai vs State Of Kerala on 19 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
Smt.Anna Mathai vs State Of Kerala on 19 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 29310 of 2006(L)


1. SMT.ANNA MATHAI, W/O.LATE MATHAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD,

3. THE PROJECT OFFICER,

4. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.J.JOSE(AEDAIODI)

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

 Dated :19/07/2007

 O R D E R
                                 KURIAN JOSEPH , J

                 ==================================

                            W.P.(C) NO. 29310 OF 2006

                 ==================================

                    Dated this the 19th day of July, 2007.


                                       JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order

or direction, commanding respondents to consider and pass

appropriate orders in Exhibit-P1 petition for One Time

Settlement as per the scheme and pass order finalising the

liability of th petitioner and file a statement before this

Honourable Court.

ii. To issue a writ of certiorari or such other appropriate writ, order

or direction and call for the records pertaining to the transaction

and quash Ext.P5 as illegal and unsustainable in the light of

payment under Exhibit-P3 receipt.

iii. To declare that the petitioner is entitled to receive back all

excess payments of Rs.52,854/- by way of penal interest

collection made by them over and above the recoverable

minimum dues under One Time Settlement Scheme and that

they are entitled to receive back the documents on the basis of

satisfying the Revenue Recovery as on the date of demand and

the payment to the Revenue Recovery officials without

appropriating collection charges.

iv. To pass such other orders including a declaration that the

hardship being found in favour of the petitioner, the respondent

is to realise only to the extent of enrichment received by the

petitioner and such other orders as this Honourable court may

deem fit, proper and necessary in the circumstances of the case

including refund of excess payments forcefully recovered

amounting to Rs.52,854/- as penal charges and Rs.19,799/- as

collection charges, total Rs.82,653/-

W.P.(C) NO. 29310/2006 : 2 :

2. There is no counter affidavit by the respondents 2 to 4. The

learned Government Pleader submits that it is for the 2nd respondent

to consider the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as

follows:

3. There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to look into

Ext.P1 with notice to the petitioner and the 4th respondent and take

appropriate action thereon, in accordance with law in the matter of one

time settlement, within a period of three months from the date of

production of a copy of this judgment. In case the petitioner has paid

the amounts demanded by the respondents, the documents shall be

returned to her. If it is found that excess amounts have been collected

from the petitioner, the same should be refunded to her.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

rv

W.P.(C) NO. 29310/2006 : 3 :