SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18129

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
MAKARAJOTHI PANCHAMI SWAYAM SAHAYASANGHAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7769 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.A.BALAGOPALAN, SHRI.A.RAJAGOPALAN, SMT.GOURI BALAGOPAL, SMT.SRUTHY R. MENON, SMT.P.SEENA
For the Respondents: SHRI.P.K.ABDUL REHMAN PANAKKADU, SMT VIDYA KURIAKOSE

The court mandated the reconsideration of rental assessments and protections against coercive actions based on disputed notices in accordance with statutory guidelines.

Headnote:This Writ Petition seeks relief against the issuance of notices pertaining to rental amounts and the petitioner's rights under relevant statutes. The Court directed the 3rd Respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and to refrain from coercive actions based on certain notices until a decision is reached. The Court emphasizes due consideration and expeditious action regarding the petitioner's claims.

Table of Content
1. introduction and prayers of the petitioner. (Para 1)
2. petitioner's satisfaction with consideration of ext.p15. (Para 2)
3. directive for expeditious decision-making. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"(i) to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, calling for the records leading to the issuance of Exts. P8, P12 and P16 and to quash the same;

(ii) to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, calling for the records leading to the issuance of Exts. P4 and quash the same to the extent it stipulates a rent of Rs. 54,823/-;

(iii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents to re- determine the rent and security deposit payable by the Petitioner strictly in accordance with Ext. P1 Government Circular, Ext. P2 Bye-laws, and Exts. P6 and P7 Government Orders, and to refund to the Petitioner any amounts collected in excess thereof;

(iv) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents to grant to the Petitioner the full benefits Exts. P6 and P7 Government Orders including rebate proportionate to the period of closure due to COVID-19 and the period during which the Petitioner was forcibly dispossessed by the Respondents;

(v) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the Respondents to grant to the Petitioner the benefits of Ext. P1 circular and P2 bye-laws and to fix the rent at 1/4th rate which is applicable to the scheduled caste community;

(vi) Declare that the action of the respondents in issuing Exts. P8, P12 and P16notices are absolutely illegal, arbitrary, unfair, unreasonable, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14and 21 of the Constitution of India ;

(vii) Declare that the petitioners are entitled to the benefits of Ext. P1 Circular, P2 Bye-laws and well as Exts.

P6 and P7 Government Orders;

(viii) It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of English translation of Vernacular Documents.

(ix) To issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

[SIC]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P15 by the 3rd respondent

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I think that prayer can be allowed. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

i) The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P15, and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

ii) Till then, no coercive steps against the petitioner shall be made based on Ext.P16.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE AJ

Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 28.02.2026
Judgment dictated 28.02.2026
Draft judgment placed 28.02.2026
Final Judgment uploaded 02.03.2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT CIRCULARNO.2378/B1/1990 DATED 01.08.1990 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BYLAWS FOR THE B.R.AMBEDKAR AYYANKALI THOZHIL PARISHEELANA KENDRAM' FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULATING THE TENANCY AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PREMISES EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RENTAL DEED DATED 19.08.2020 FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENTING OUT THE GROUND FLOOR EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top