High Court Kerala High Court

P.M.Scaria vs The State Of Kerala on 28 May, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.M.Scaria vs The State Of Kerala on 28 May, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 13135 of 2009(J)


1. P.M.SCARIA,AGED 56 YEARS
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MARY SCARIA, W/O.P.M. SCARIA OF DO..DO..

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY TO FINANCE

3. THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES

4. THE SUB TREASURY OFFICER

5. DASTHIKIR SAHIB

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :28/05/2009

 O R D E R
                            V.GIRI,J.
                      -------------------------
                  W.P ( C) No.13135 of 2009
                     --------------------------
                Dated this the 28th May,2009

                       J U D G M E N T

Petitioners claim that they had constructed a

building on the strength of the promise held out by the

Department of Treasury for the Sub Treasury Office,

Pathanapuram. Exhibit-P1 agreement was also executed

between the owners of the building and the 3rd

respondent, the Director of Treasuries by which building

was taken on lease by the Department for a period of

three years at a monthly rent of Rs.6704/-. It is

contended that Exhibit-P2 agreement was later renewed

for another three years as evidenced by Exhibit-P3 and it

has expired on 30.7.2007. According to the petitioners,

the rent was then fixed as Rs.9723/-. Petitioners’

complaint at this stage is that the respondents are taking

steps to shift the Sub Treasury to another building which

is situated about 200 meters away from their building.

Consequently the rent payable to them as arrears is

W.P ( C) No.13135 of 2009
2

Rs.2,43,075/-.

2. As regards the shifting of the Treasury office, it

is obviously the wisdom of the Government Department

which should prevail. But there is no reason why the

request made by the petitioner as per Exhibit-P5 before the

3rd respondent should not be looked into by him.

3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd

respondent to consider Exhibit-P5 and take appropriate

decision thereon, within a period of two months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the

meanwhile, the actual arrears of rent due to the petitioners

shall be paid within the said time frame.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(V.GIRI,JUDGE)
ma

W.P ( C) No.13135 of 2009
3

W.P ( C) No.13135 of 2009
4