<p>An IAS officer in Kerala has been asked by the Kerala High Court to plant 100 saplings.</p>.<p>The exceptional punishment was given to Industries Director K Biju on Friday for a nearly two-decade delay in taking a final decision on a private firm's request for sales tax relaxations.</p>.<p>Biju is the son of Kerala Water Resources Minister K Krishnankutty who is also a known farmer of Palakkad district in central Kerala.</p>.<p>Justice Amit Rawal, who considered the case, held all officers who held the Industries Director post over these years responsible. Since K Biju is now holding the post, he was directed to plant 100 saplings at the locations to be identified by the Kerala Forest Department.</p>.<p>According to sources, the private firm in the chemical sector sought tax concessions in 2001. But the Industries Department rejected it. The firm later approached the High Court and the court in 2003 to direct the Industries Department to offer a hearing for the applicant. But despite conducting several hearings, the department did not take a decision on the matter.</p>.<p>The private firm again approached the court and the court ordered the exceptional punishment considering the inordinate delay in finalising the application.</p>
<p>An IAS officer in Kerala has been asked by the Kerala High Court to plant 100 saplings.</p>.<p>The exceptional punishment was given to Industries Director K Biju on Friday for a nearly two-decade delay in taking a final decision on a private firm's request for sales tax relaxations.</p>.<p>Biju is the son of Kerala Water Resources Minister K Krishnankutty who is also a known farmer of Palakkad district in central Kerala.</p>.<p>Justice Amit Rawal, who considered the case, held all officers who held the Industries Director post over these years responsible. Since K Biju is now holding the post, he was directed to plant 100 saplings at the locations to be identified by the Kerala Forest Department.</p>.<p>According to sources, the private firm in the chemical sector sought tax concessions in 2001. But the Industries Department rejected it. The firm later approached the High Court and the court in 2003 to direct the Industries Department to offer a hearing for the applicant. But despite conducting several hearings, the department did not take a decision on the matter.</p>.<p>The private firm again approached the court and the court ordered the exceptional punishment considering the inordinate delay in finalising the application.</p>
