High Court Kerala High Court

Sobha @ Gladys D’ Cruz vs The District Collector on 12 November, 2007

Kerala High Court
Sobha @ Gladys D’ Cruz vs The District Collector on 12 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 29882 of 2007(G)


1. SOBHA @ GLADYS D' CRUZ, W/O. LATE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD,

3. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY (LOANS),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH

                For Respondent  :SRI.A.JAYASANKAR, SC KSHB, TVM

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :12/11/2007

 O R D E R
                   ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

              = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
              W.P.(C) No. 29882 OF 2007 G
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

          Dated this the  12th  November, 2007

                    J U D G M E N T

The prayer in this writ petition is to quash Exts.

P2 and P4 and to direct the respondents to consider

Ext. P3 within a time frame. Petitioner submits that

steps are now sought to be initiated for recovery of

the dues which her husband owed to the 2nd respondent.

According to the writ petitioner, she had made Ext. P3

representation seeking reduction of interest and waiver

penal interest as well as an instalment facility to pay

off the actual liability. She complains that ignoring

the representation so made and without passing orders

thereon, liability has been unilaterally quantified and

steps are taken to recover the dues.

2. On instruction, the learned Standing Counsel for

the 2nd respondent submits that Ext. P3 application made

by the petitioner was received by the 2nd respondent

after the period of one time settlement was over. It is

also submitted that presently the liability of the

petitioner has been quantified at Rs. 2,22,645/-.

WPC No.29882/07

– 2 –

3. Since the liability is admitted, and as the

parties are governed by the terms of a contract, the

liability of the petitioner has to be determined in

terms thereof. Reduction is possible only if the 2nd

respondent is willing to favourably consider Ext.P3

representation that is now pending without orders.

4. Irrespective of the fact that the period of one

time settlement which was then in vogue is over, still as

the petitioner has already made Ext. P3 representation

which is admittedly pending without orders thereon, and

as she is willing to discharge the liability, I dispose

of this writ petition directing that the 2nd respondent

shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 as expeditiously

as possible, at any rate within a period of four weeks of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment

before the 2nd respondent for compliance.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-