Johnson. K.J v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2015/16TH ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 16872 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

--------------------- JOHNSON K.J., S/O.JOHN, KACHAPILLY HOUSE, CHENDAMANGALAM THURUTHIPURAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J. MURICKEN RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PALAYAM P.O., PIN-695 001.

2. DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL CENTRE, CIVIL STATION, KUNNUMPURAM ROAD, KAKKANAD ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

3. THE GENERAL MANAGER DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL CENTRE, CIVIL STATION KUNNUMPURAM ROAD, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, NORTH PARAVUR, NORTH PARAVUR P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 513.

5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, CHENDAMANGALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM - 683 512.

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.T. SHEEBA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 16872 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1.

COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED FROM THE LISIE HOSPITAL, KOCHI DATED 13.9.14.

EXHIBIT P2.

COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 24.3.15.

EXHIBIT P3.

COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ---------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

******************************************************* W.P.(C) No.16872 of 2015 ******************************************************* Dated this the 7th day of July, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner had availed a loan from the District Industrial Centre, Ernakulam. This was for the purpose of Small Scale Unit conducted by the petitioner. It appears that the Small Scale Unit has been closed down. The petitioner approached the second respondent by Ext.P3 for One Time Settlement Scheme. The petitioner highlighted his grievances in Ext.P3 for his inability to run the Unit and repay the loan amount.

In that view of the matter, an appropriate decision shall be taken by the third respondent if any Scheme is otherwise available for settling the liability by availing One Time Settlement Scheme. Needful shall be done within a period of two months after hearing the petitioner. Till a decision is taken as above, all coercive steps against the petitioner shall be deferred.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln