Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mahalakshmi, vs the Executive Engineer,

Mahalakshmi, vs The Executive Engineer,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 05, 2022
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1439937

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C)/140/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mahalakshmi,

Respondent

The Executive Engineer,

Excerpt

.....of surcharge. the petitioners have no legal right to continue in the quarters so long as the 2nd petitioner is not in service. in the circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, contends the learned standing counsel.4. i have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel representing the respondent.5. the main reason advanced by the petitioners seeking to continue in the quarters is that their son is studying for plus two and if before the academic year theyare forced to vacate the quarters, career of their son will be in jeopardy. considering the facts, this court is of the view that this is a matter that can be considered by the respondent - executive engineer. however, the petitioners are liable to pay arrears of rent during the period they are occupying the quarters. in the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed ofdirecting the petitioners to remit the arrears of rent in respect of residential quarters within a period of two weeks. if the petitioners remit the arrears within the aforesaid period of two weeks, the respondent shall consider ext.p2 representation submitted by the petitioners for continuing in the quarters till the end of the academic year, on a compassionate basis.sd/- n. nagaresh judge ncd/05.01.2022 appendix of wp(c) 140/2022 petitioner's exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the order dated 03.11.2021 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises. exhibit p2 true copy of the representation dated 06.11.2021 preferred by the 1st petitioner before the respondent. exhibit p3 true copy of the order dated 22.12.2021 issued by the respondent.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022/15TH POUSHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 140 OF 2022 PETITIONERS: 1 MAHALAKSHMI, AGED 52 YEARS, W/O. CHANDRAN, QUARTERS NO.D-17, KSEB COLONY, KALLARKUTTY, IDUKKI -685 562. 2 CHANDRAN M., AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. MARIYAPPAN, QUARTERS NO. D-17, KSEB COLONY, KALLARKUTTY, IDUKKI-685 562. BY ADVS. RENJITH B.MARAR LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL ARUN POOMULLI SURABHI SANTHOSH SRILAKSHMI NAIR R RESPONDENT: EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, GENERATION DIVISION, KALLARKUTTY, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 562. BY ADV.SRI.B.PRAMOD, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 5th day of January, 2022 The 2nd petitioner who was an Assistant Engineer

under the Kerala State Electricity Board was allotted quarters for residential purpose. The 1 st petitioner is the wife of the 2nd petitioner. The 2nd petitioner was convicted for a criminal offence on 22.02.2020. An appeal is preferred by the petitioner. However, in the meanwhile, the petitioner was removed from service based on the conviction by

criminal court. Now the respondent has issued a notice dated 03.11.2021 directing the 2nd petitioner to vacate the

quarters allocated to him. It is aggrieved by the said order

that the petitioners are before this Court.

2. The petitioners submit that their son is studying for Plus Two Course and during the academic year if the petitioners are evicted from the quarters, the educational

career of the petitioners' son will be adversely affected. Therefore the petitioners pray that Exts.P1 and P3 may be quashed and the respondent be directed to consider Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioner.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for the KSEB

points out that as per Ext.P3, the petitioners are liable to pay arrears of rent to the tune of `14,487/- inclusive of surcharge. The petitioners have no legal right to continue in the quarters so long as the 2nd petitioner is not in service. In the circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, contends the learned Standing Counsel.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent.

5. The main reason advanced by the petitioners seeking to continue in the quarters is that their son is studying for Plus Two and if before the academic year they

are forced to vacate the quarters, career of their son will be in jeopardy. Considering the facts, this Court is of the view that this is a matter that can be considered by the respondent - Executive Engineer. However, the petitioners are liable to pay arrears of rent during the period they are occupying the quarters. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the petitioners to remit the arrears of rent in respect of residential quarters within a period of two weeks. If the petitioners remit the arrears within the aforesaid period of two weeks, the respondent shall consider Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioners for continuing in the quarters till the end of the academic year, on a compassionate basis.

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd/05.01.2022 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 140/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.11.2021 DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO VACATE THE PREMISES. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.11.2021 PREFERRED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial