WP(C) NO. 27251 OF 2014 1 2025:KER:22508 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 27251 OF 2014 PETITIONER/S: AJITHA HARIDASAN AGED 37 YEARS W/O.HARIDASAN P.K., PAINKANNIPARAMBIL HOUSE, MARUTHAYUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680507. ADV.N.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DISTRICT COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003. 3 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R.) CHAVAKKAD- CHAVAKKAD-680506. 4 THE PAVARATTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH PAVARATTY P.O., THRISSUR -680507, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PAVARATTY VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT- 680507. BY ADV SRI.RAJIT OTHER PRESENT: R1- SMT.RASHMI.K.M,SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 27251 OF 2014 2 2025:KER:22508 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P6 and P7 demand notices issued by the 4th respondent, Panchayat. The case of the petitioner is that he has availed a loan under the Kerala Vikasan Padhathy of Pavaratty Grama Panchayat, a project in which women were given training in driving of vehicles, giving driving licenses on its expenses and also providing monetary help in buying autorickshaw. 2. The petitioner applied under the above project with necessary information and documents. The application was scrutinised by the Panchayat and considering the merit of the petitioner, she was selected from ward No.8 to the scheme for buying autorikshaw under the Kerala Development Project and if the bank provides loan, then Panchayat would give the subsidy of Rs.20,000/- to the bank. After purchasing the autorickshaw on 30.01.2004, the petitioner received a letter from the 4th respondent Panchayat to produce Caste certificate, income certificate and also a certified copy of the registration certificate of the Autorickshaw. Thereafter on 03.03.2004, the petitioner received Ext.P3 stating that she had submitted an application for the benefit for purchasing autorikshaw meant for Scheduled Caste women under the Kerala Development Project during 2002-2003 misrepresenting that she belongs to Scheduled Caste and thereby she received subsidy of WP(C) NO. 27251 OF 2014 3 2025:KER:22508 Rs.20,000/- through Canara Bank, Pavaratty. It was also stated that though a notice was issued to the petitioner on 30.01.2004, she did not reply. Hence, she was directed to remit the subsidy amount along with the interest to the Panchayat. This was on the background that, it was found that she does not belong to the Scheduled Caste. 3. Under such circumstances, the petitioner was called upon to submit explanation within 3 working days in writing before the Secretary and to remit Rs.20,000/- along with 18% interest and obtain receipt, otherwise, coercive steps would be taken against her. The contentions raised by the petitioner is that the 4th respondent issued Ext.P4 notice dated 30.04.2007 after three years, intimating that criminal and revenue recovery proceedings will be initiated against the petitioner. This was replied by the petitioner as per Ext.P5. Thereafter no further steps were taken. It was submitted that the petitioner belongs to OBC and she had disclosed the same while submitting the application. Thereafter, after 7 years from 2007, the 4th respondent issued Exts.P6 and P7 demand notices to distrain the movable properties towards the arrears of public revenue due on land from petitioner which fell due on 26.03.2003 amounting to Rs.59,038/- along with 18% interest from 26.03.2003. 4. In response to that the 4th respondent Panchayat has produced a statement wherein it is stated that petitioner has WP(C) NO. 27251 OF 2014 4 2025:KER:22508 submitted an application claiming that she belongs to a member of Scheduled Caste. Based on the recitals in Ext.R4(A), the petitioner was selected and given financial assistance. The petitioner also signed an undertaking to the 4th respondent stating that if it is found that she had submitted any false information or acted against the terms of the welfare scheme, then she would be liable to repay the amount of Rs.20,000/- along with interest. Going by Annexure R4(a) against serial No.2 in the application, she has deliberately ticked against the column-Scheduled Caste. 5. Going by Annexure R4(B) undertaken given by the petitioner, she admitted herself that if she has given any false information, she is bound to repay the amount with interest. Going through the undertaking as well as considering the application it appears that though the petitioner raised a contention that she belongs to OBC, she has wilfully acted against the contention raised in this writ petition as evident from Annexure R4(A) and (B). Under such circumstances, I am of the view that there is no merit in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed. sd/ P.M.MANOJ JUDGE jm/ WP(C) NO. 27251 OF 2014 5 2025:KER:22508 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27251/2014 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.20-8-2014 IN WPC 1933/2012 EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE DEMAND NOTICE DT.10-10-2014. EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.10-3-2003. EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE BEARING COLLECTORATE FILE NO.2014/6188/8 FORM NO.1 DT.1-9-2014. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER B2 360/03 DT.3-3-2004. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B2-360/03 DT.30-4-2007. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DT.10-5-2007 SENT BY ADV.VELAYUDHAN. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.J- 21-2001 DT.19-3-2003. EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE BEARING TALUK (B5) AND FILE NO.2014/1707/8/400 FORM NO.10 DT.1-9-2014. RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit-R4 (A) A true copy of the application submitted by the petitioner before the panchayat dated 09.01.2003 Exhibit-R4 (B) A true copy of the undertaking dated 11.04.2003