High Court Kerala High Court

Joseph Mathew vs State Of Kerala on 8 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Joseph Mathew vs State Of Kerala on 8 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20481 of 2008(L)


1. JOSEPH MATHEW, PROPRIETOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION

3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION,

4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR)

5. VALLIYAMMAL, C.C. 40/49/10

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :08/07/2008

 O R D E R
                       S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                ------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C)No.20481 OF 2008
              ----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims to be a tenant under the 6th

respondent. The 4th respondent initiated proceedings under the

Kerala Building (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1968,

which resulted in an order and a notice directing the petitioner to

quit. Against the same, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal as

provided under the Act. The petitioner seeks a direction to the

3rd respondent to consider and pass order on Ext.P3

expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader and the

learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. In

the nature of the order I propose to pass I do not think it

necessary to issue notice to respondents 5 and 6. Now that a

statutory appeal has been filed, the 3rd respondent has a duty to

consider and pass orders on the same expeditiously. This the 3rd

respondent shall do, after affording an opportunity of being heard

to the petitioner as well as respondents 2, 5 and 6, as

W.P.(c)No.20481/08 2

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The petitioner submits that he has already filed an application

for stay, which also may be directed to be considered. If the

petitioner approaches the 3rd respondent with a certified copy

of this judgment, the 3rd respondent shall assign a date of

hearing for hearing the stay petition and the stay petition shall

be considered and disposed of on that date.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd

W.P.(c)No.20481/08 3