CHARUVILKULANGARA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY Vs. STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P6 Government Order, whereby a period of five years is fixed for the defaulters of revenue dues to the Government for submitting application seeking re-conveyance of land purchased by the Government as "bought in land", seeking direction to the 1st respondent to accord sanction to the petitioner society to pay the entire amount due to the 5th respondent, and also to accord sanction to re-convey the property covered by Ext.P1 to the Co-operative Society specified above, and to quash Ext.P5 order refusing the relief thus sought for. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

(2.) Petitioner society availed a loan of Rs.1, 23, 700/- from the 5th respondent during the year 1993, offering the property covered by Ext.P1 as collateral security. The extent of land is 4.5 acres situate in Sooranadu South Village. Due to default in repayment of loan, the property was put to auction under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, after complying with the procedures contemplated thereunder, and since there were no purchasers for the property, the same was purchased by the Government as "bought in land", on 09.08.2002, evident from Ext.P3 dated 25.05.2013. Even though the President of the Society has submitted Ext.P4 on 18.04.2013, same was rejected by the 1st respondent as per Ext.P5 order dated 16.05.2013, stating that the petitioner has not submitted application within the time period prescribed for re-purchase of the bought in land, as per the stipulations contained under Ext.P6 Government Order. It is thus challenging Ext.P5, and also the stipulations contained under Ext.P6, to submit any application within the time period of five years, this writ petition is filed.

(3.) A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent, traversing through the circumstances under which Ext.P1 property was put to sale and also submitting that the entire action initiated by the State Government was in accordance with law. It is also submitted that, even after repeated requests by the revenue recovery officials, petitioner failed to remit the dues. It was thereupon only the property was attached. It is also submitted that, as per Ext.P6 Government Order, re-conveyance is possible only if the request is made within five years from the date on which the property was purchased by the State Government as bought in land. The 2nd respondent has also filed a counter affidavit, justifying the circumstances which culminated in the sale of property covered by Ext.P1 deed.