High Court Kerala High Court

The State Of Kerala vs The Cochin Port Trust on 19 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
The State Of Kerala vs The Cochin Port Trust on 19 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 712 of 2008()


1. THE STATE OF KERALA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE COCHIN PORT TRUST
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :19/08/2008

 O R D E R
                                     V. GIRI, J.
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               R.P. No. 712/2008 in W.P.(C).4504/2006
                                            &
                R.P. No. 875/2008 in W.P.(C).5791/2004
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                 Dated this the 19th day of August 2008

                                     O R D E R

Having heard the learned Government Pleader and learned

counsel for the writ petitioner, I do not find any grounds to review the

judgment as such.

2. Learned Government Pleader presses into service Rule 4

(viii) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Rules to justify the demand for

collection charges. He further submits that the validity of Rule 4(viii)

was not the subject matter of challenge in any other writ petitions. I

find that Rule 4(viii) was not a matter of fact pressed into service at

the time of hearing of the writ petition. But, prima facie, I am of the

view that, the arguments which were found to be not weighty enough

by this court in relation to Rule 5, would apply to Rule 4(viii) also. It

is not necessary to finally pronounce on this aspect, in as much as

the parties have not joined issue on this aspect in the instant case.

But, nevertheless, I do not find any ground to take a different view

from what I have already taken in the judgment. I had taken note of

the fact that both State and writ petitioner were respondents in the

RP Nos.712 & 815 OF 2008

-:2:-

land acquisition awards and ultimately the writ petitioner had satisfied

the award by depositing the amount in court. For all these reasons, I

do not find any grounds to review the judgment. But, I make it clear

that, I have not considered the issue, which the learned Government

Pleader submits, arises from Rule 4(viii) of the Kerala Revenue

Recovery Rules either in these Review Petitions or in the judgment

which has led to these Review Petitions as such.

(V. GIRI, JUDGE)

ttb