Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR versus THE STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR v. THE STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 30471 of 2006(S) [2007] RD-KL 1644 (22 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 30471 of 2006(S)

1. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. THE AGRICULTURE PRODUCTION(COMMISSIONER)

3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.V.K.BALI The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :22/01/2007

O R D E R

V.K.Bali,C.J. & S.Siri Jagan,J.

W.P.(C).No.30471 of 2006-S

Dated, this the 22nd day of January, 2007



JUDGMENT

V.K.Bali,C.J. (Oral) This writ has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of public interest litigation. The petitioner being the Managing Editor of magazine to espouse the cause of agriculture has filed the petition to protect the interest of public for the sake of agriculture. It is the case of the petitioner that the budget allocation for agriculture would lapse due to the delay in granting administrative sanction for the schemes formulated by the department of agriculture. The sanction has to be accorded by empowered committee, whose Chairman is the 2nd respondent. In this financial year budget allocation for agriculture was made and even after a lapse of 7 months when the petition was filed and the financial year would come to an end on 31.3.2007, only 10% of the budget allocation has been spent on agriculture. WP(C).No.30471 of 2006-S - 2 -

2. When the matter came up for hearing before us on 17.11.2006, Government Pleader was asked to have instructions in the matter. On 4.1.2007, Government Pleader sought time to file counter affidavit and the matter was adjourned to 15.1.2007. On 15.1.2007 when the matter came up for hearing, finding that no counter affidavit has been filed by the State, Court granted a final opportunity to file counter affidavit. So far, no counter has been filed. Today, learned Government Pleader, however, contends that there is some difficulty for granting administrative sanction and that efforts are being made to grant the required administrative sanction.

3. The facts contained in the petition have not been disputed, but what appears to be the case of the State is that administrative sanction would take some time. As we have already mentioned, the financial year would come to an end on 31.3.2007 and any further delay in the matter would make the budget allocation lapse, thus, causing immense loss to the agriculture. We may mention that this Court has found in the newspapers that farmers are committing suicide for inadequate facilities provided to them. Considering the totality of the facts WP(C).No.30471 of 2006-S - 3 - and circumstances of the case, we direct the State to grant administrative sanction within seven days and spend the budget allocation amount within this financial year. The writ petition is disposed of as indicated above. V.K.Bali Chief Justice S.Siri Jagan vku/- Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.