T.S. SUBRAMANIAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader. On perusal of records, we note that on receipt of a demand notice fixing the quantum of lease amount as Rs. 12,42,082.50, the appellant had approached this Court which resulted in Ext.P19 judgment. As per Ext.P19 judgment, paragraphs 5 and 6 were relevant for compliance by the appellant and consideration by the State which read as follows:

(2.) WE are now concerned with the appeal impugning the judgment in W.P.C. No. 2872/07. From the records and two judgments referred above, what we notice and according to the appellant, there was no basis to fix the lease amount and even otherwise, the State authorities have indiscriminately fixed the lease amount when compared to similarly situated lands in the neighbourhood. According to learned counsel for the appellant, unless there is determination of annual lease amount by the Government, the question of depositing any amount would not arise. Therefore, the impugned judgment has practically become impossible to be executed or implemented. Hence he seeks for modification of the direction of the learned Single Judge.