WP(C) NO. 3852 OF 2013 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 3852 OF 2013
PETITIONER/S:
P. MOHANAN
S/O LATE VELAYUDHAN, PANNIKODAN HOUSE, MAITHARA P.O.,
VIA AREEKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 639.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY
SRI.S.GOPAKUMAR
SMT.K.JASMIN BABY
SMT.K.S.SUMITHA
SRI.R.SANJITH
SMT.C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH
SMT.S.SIMY
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM-695 001.
2 THE MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY
MALAPPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM-676 505 REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY.
3 THE SECRETARY
THE MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY, MALAPPURAM P.O.,
MALAPPURAM-676 505.
4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
EXCISE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MALAPPURAM-673 638.
BY ADV SRI.ESM.KABEER
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 3852 OF 2013 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C.) No. 3852 of 2013
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed following prayers :
I. "To call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibits P3 and P5 orders, examine their legality, propriety and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari. II. To issue a writ of mandamus and command the respondents 2 and 3 to accept new application for license from the petitioner and consider the same in accordance with law and pass order on the same as expeditiously as possible. III. To pass any other and such other reliefs as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper to pass in the nature and circumstance of the case.
IV. To award the cost of this proceedings to the petitioner." [SIC]
2. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the license to conduct the toddy shop is already renewed. In such circumstances, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prayers in this writ petition are infructuous.
Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
SD/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS