Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
T.R.SURESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner sought remission based on business failure. (Para 2) |
| 2. panchayat initiated remission approval but required government consent. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
“[A] Declare that the petitioner is entitled to remission of fee payable for the meat stall bid in auction for the year 2020-21 from the Erattayar Panchayat in accordance with Rule 4 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Granting of Remission to Contractors and Lessees) Rules, 1998.
[B] Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent/Municipality to consider and pass orders on Ext. P4 representation in accordance with Rule 4 and 5 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Granting of Remission to Contractors and Lessees) Rules, 1998.
[C] Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. It is averred that the petitioner bid in auction the meat stalls in the 2nd respondent panchayat for the period 2020-2021 for a total amount of Rs.22,01,000/- + 18% GST + 1% cess. Petitioner has remitted Rs.11,00,500/- on the date of auction on 17.03.2020. When the petitioner conducted the meat stall from 01.04.2020,
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
