P.A. PHAISAL Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P9 and P23 orders by which respondents 1 and 3 issued orders for resumption of the land which was allotted to the petitioner for running an industrial unit.

(2.) The General Manager, District Industries Centre, Thiruvananthapuram allotted 607.060 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.2623 of Kadakampalli Village in Thiruvananthapuram Taluk in the development area, Veli to Mr. M.A.Karim, who was the Managing Partner of M/s. International Rubber Works, on a hire purchase basis for establishment of industrial unit, for manufacture of mixed rubber compound, thread rubber etc. The possession of land was already given on 31.8.1979. As per Ext.P1 order dated 29.3.1980, the Director of Industries and Commerce, Thiruvananthapuram regularised that allotment, subject to the conditions mentioned therein and subject to the Kerala Allotment of Government Land in Development Areas on Hire Purchase for Industrial Purposes Rules (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Allotment Rules, 1969) issued in G.O.(Ms) No. 169/69/ID dated 5.4.1969. The value of the land was fixed as Rs. 1,66,941.50. In Ext.P1 order itself stated that the applicant had remitted a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) towards earnest money on 27.6.1979 and had remitted a sum of Rs. 33,388.30 towards 20% of the cost, on 30.8.1979. As per the conditions, the allotted land shall be utilised only for the purpose for which it was allotted. The allottee was to remit a sum of Rs. 1,33,553.20 towards the balance amount of 80% of the cost, in 10 equal instalments within 10 years along with interest at the rate of 6-1/2% per annum. Clause 7 provided that in case of default in payment of 2 consecutive instalments, the land allotted shall be resumed possession by the Department. As per clause 9, the allottee and all the partners of the unit were to execute an agreement also. Clause 12 of Ext P1 is relevant, which provided as follows:

(3.) According to the petitioner the unit started production on 23.10.1983. Ext.P2 registration certificate was issued on 15.4.1985. The petitioner submits that since major portion of the land allotted was required for the unit and remained unutilised, Government resumed an extent of 411.066 cents of land in July 1984 and the balance extent of 196 cents remained with the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the total cost of 196 cents of land which remained with him came to about Rs. 53,900/- only and even before 31.8.1981 itself, he had already remitted a sum of Rs. 76,593/- far in excess of the land value. Petitioner also submits that on resumption of land in 1984, he was entitled to compensation towards the value of improvements also and that, as per Rule 18 of the allotment rules 1969, Government had approved payment of a sum of Rs. 44,720/- towards compensation for the improvements. Petitioner submits that he submitted several representations for assignment of land and for the refund since 1987 and even after completion of 10 year period the respondents did take any action for assignment of land.