High Court Kerala High Court

Valsala vs Asst.Secretary on 4 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
Valsala vs Asst.Secretary on 4 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22038 of 2009(Y)



1. VALSALA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. ASST.SECRETARY ,KSHB
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :04/08/2009

 O R D E R
                 P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
              ........................................................................
                  W.P.(C) No. 22038 OF 2009
             .........................................................................
                    Dated this the 4th August, 2009



                                 J U D G M E N T

The petitioner had availed a housing loan from the first

respondent, available to the Middle Income Group (MIG in short)

to the tune of about Rs. 2 lakhs. It is stated that the petitioner

was prompt enough in remitting the monthly installments , but

she could not continue to effect payments because of some

serious ailments, due to ‘Parkinson’s disease’ from the year

2002.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that,

despite all the adverse circumstances, the petitioner, with the

intent to clear the entire liability, had approached the

respondents on many an occasion, seeking to furnish a

statement of accounts giving credit to the payments already

effected and also to extend eligible concessions as being

extended to other similarly situated persons by the Housing

Board. It is stated that the first respondent did not pay any

W.P.(C) No. 22038 OF 2009

2

heed to the grievances projected by the petitioner, which made

her to approach this Court, particularly when confronted with

the Revenue Recovery steps as borne by Ext. P1.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent ,

on instruction, submits that the benefit of ‘OTS’ was not available

at the relevant time, when the petitioner approached the first

respondent. However, the learned Counsel submits that

necessary instructions have been obtained from the first

respondent, stating that a new notification with regard to ‘OTS’

has already been issued on 31.07.2009 and if the petitioner

approaches the first respondent with a fresh application within

one month, claiming the benefit thereon, the same will definitely

be considered in accordance with law.

4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is permitted

to approach the first respondent to extend the benefit of ‘OTS’

by filing a detailed representation within one month, also

referring to the payments already effected. On such an event,

the said application shall be considered by the first respondent in

accordance with law and all the eligible benefits shall be

W.P.(C) No. 22038 OF 2009

3

extended to the petitioner, enabling her to clear the liability as

provided under the Scheme. Subject to the above, all the

coercive steps, stated as being pursued against the petitioner

on the basis of Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance, till appropriate

orders are passed on the application to be preferred by the

petitioner for ‘OTS’ as specified above.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

lk