SHIBU GEORGE Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy in this writ petition is regarding the claim of the petitioner for continuance of occupation in an industrial building constructed by the Panchayat in the Ezhumattoor mini industrial estate. THE petitioner obtained possession based on a lease granted in his favour. According to the petitioner, the period of the lease was five years and when the petitioner sought its renewal, Panchayat wanted revision of rent by four times. Petitioner says that though he offered reasonable increase in the rent, Panchayat was unwilling to renew the lease. In such circumstances, petitioner approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 2078/11 seeking renewal of the lease and also to quash the eviction notice.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the writ petition, Panchayat issued Ext.P3 tender notice and awarded the tender to the 3rd respondent. It appears from the counter affidavit that in the tender process, petitioner also had participated, but his offer was lesser as compared to that made by the 3rd respondent. In such circumstances, the writ petition was disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the award in appropriate proceedings and accordingly the petitioner filed Ext.P5 appeal and on its rejection by Ext.P6 order, he moved the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions by filing a revision. That revision was also rejected by Ext.P9. It is challenging the aforesaid proceedings, the writ petition has been filed.

(3.) IN so far as Ext.P14 is concerned, Ext.P14 only says that the mini industrial estate was set up for the entrepreneurs of the Panchayat. This in my view does not mean that entrepreneur should also be resident of the Panchayat or that the industrial estate was developed for the benefit of the residents of the Panchayat alone to the total exclusion of others. Consequently, the contention now raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted and I do not find any reason to entertain the writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed.