IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 4228 of 2010(C)
1. VEEPEEYES ASSOCIATES, CHETTIKULANGARA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.H.B.SHENOY
For Respondent :SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :01/03/2010
O R D E R
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.4228 of 2010
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of March, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner seeks for a direction to the respondent to
allow/permit petitioner to remove the remaining sand from the
elevated sand pad/foundation seating the demolished tanks and
tank beds together, upto ground level, in entirety, from their
Kollam IRD at Ponmana P.O., Edapallikotta, Kollam,- 691583.,
and also issue gate passes to petitioner, for its removal.
2. The petitioner is a successful bidder for purchase of
assets including dismantling and removal of buildings in Kollam
IRD of the respondent at Ponmana.P.O. Petitioner had
successfully bid for purchase of the same at price of
Rs.1,02,97,040/- and accordingly they were issued with the
acceptance letter. Ext.P1 is the copy of the acceptance letter.
Petitioner had paid the bid amount in entirety and accordingly,
petitioner was issued with Delivery Order dated 3/1/2009.
3. It appears that when the petitioner started to remove
the assets sold to them, there were obstructions from certain
local people which compelled the petitioner to approach this
Court by filing W.P.(C)No.7390 of 2009. The petitioner was
W.P.(C)No.4228 of 2010
2
granted police protection by this Court and almost all the assets
were removed from the subject site of the respondent by
petitioner, except the five Tanks specified as last item in Ext.P3
as also one building being retained as petitioner’s office, to be
removed last. What remains is the demolition of the tank
foundation and bringing the space to ground level as is required
by Ext.P3, with the sand collected to form the tank foundation
also being removed to restore the space to ground level. It
appears that the Tahsildar, Karunagappally came to the site on
10/6/2009 and directed the petitioner not to remove sand from
the site, without obtaining permission from his office.
Subsequently, the revenue authorities issued Ext.P6 permission
to remove the sand being collected from the subject site on
demolition of the tank foundations there.
4. The petitioner there after sought for issuance of gate
passes which was refused by the respondent. The petitioner
again approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.25937 of 2009
seeking for a direction to the respondent to issue gate passes to
the petitioner for removal of the sand. This was disposed of by
judgment dated 18/9/2009 directing the respondent to issue gate
W.P.(C)No.4228 of 2010
3
passes to the petitioner to remove sand from the sand pads
which form the base of the dismantled steel tanks and remaining
steel tanks in the event of petitioner filing an undertaking in the
form of an affidavit attested by a Notary before the respondent
undertaking that he will not remove sand from below the ground
level and also abide by the terms and conditions in Ext.P6 order.
Ext.P7 is the said judgment and Ext.P8 is the copy of the
undertaking in the form of affidavit submitted by the petitioner
before the respondent. Ext.P9 is the copy of the affidavit filed by
him before the Village Officer also.
5. Further troubles occurred thereafter even though he
was allowed to remove the sand from the sand pad/foundation,
but not in entirety. The Sales Officer of the respondent by the
end of October, 2009 directed him to stop further removal of
sand. Ext.P10 is the copy of the letter submitted by the
petitioner for enabling the petitioner to remove the remaining
sand upto ground level, in entirety. Since the respondent has
not taken any favourable action, the petitioner has filed this writ
petition.
W.P.(C)No.4228 of 2010
4
6. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the
respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner will be allowed to
remove sand as per the conditions and to enable the petitioner to
remove the same, an authorised officer of the respondent will be
present at the site itself during the period of removal to oversee
the entire activities of the petitioner. The learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that within 15 days the same will be
removed. In view of the above submission, respondent will take
appropriate action to allow the petitioner to remove the
remaining items in terms of the conditions and an authorised
officer of the respondent will oversee the removal of the sand for
a smooth conduct of the operation by the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE
skj