R. SUBHADRAMMA Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an entrepreneur. She was allotted an industrial plot consisting of 50 cents originally in Survey No.337/6 in Vettiyar Village by the District Industries Centre, Alleppey. She was allotted another plot of 25 cents in the same survey number. The Government framed rules for assignment of the Government land for industrial purposes. There are two modes of disposal of the land. One is by way of hire purchase agreement and the other by an outright sale. As seen from Ext.P1 allotment, for allotting 50 cents, it was based on a hire purchase agreement. As seen from Ext.P2, for allotting 25 cents, it appears that this was allotted based on outright purchase method. In Ext.P1 agreement, it is stated that the value fixed for the allotment is tentative and the allottee is liable to pay the land value at the revised rate that may be necessitated on account of the enhancement of compensation for the land required. In Ext.P2 outright sale, it is also stated that the allottee is liable to pay any amount which is found due at a later stage due to enhancement of compensation for the land required or such other reason. Therefore, fixation of the price for allotment was tentative subject to other conditions agreed in the agreement.

(2.) The petitioner appears to have filed an application for assignment. She received a response stating that the petitioner will have to pay Rs. 1,43,319/- as the balance land value in addition to the amount already remitted by her. The said decision of the respondents is under challenge in this writ petition. According to the petitioner, she had remitted the entire value and therefore, the petitioner is not liable to pay any amount. The petitioner's case is that she will be liable to pay additional amount only in circumstances where an enhancement compensation is awarded by any competent court enhancing the land value which was acquired for the industrial purposes.

(3.) The original allotment of the petitioner in respect of 50 cents was based on hire purchase agreement. As evident from the agreement itself, the fixation of the land was only tentative. The petitioner submitted an application for assignment on 31.1.2003. The original allotment was on 17.9.1988 as well as on 15.2.1988. The rate that is applicable at the time of the assignment alone to be considered for such assignment. As seen from Ext.R3(b), the rules for assignment of the Government land for industrial purposes, the person applying for assignment of land in the development area has to pay the land value fixed by the Government as on the date of application for assignment. The petitioner cannot ignore Ext.R3(b) as it is a part of allotment made in favour of her. It is to be noted that though the land was allotted to the petitioner as per Exts.P1 and P2, there was no transfer of interest. The real question on value would arise only on the date on which interest is transferred unless otherwise agreed between the parties.