Thirukochi Residency vs The Hotel And Restaurants ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5594 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

     TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942

                       WP(C).No.2536 OF 2021(N)


PETITIONER:

               THIRUKOCHI RESIDENCY
               AYIROOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. REP.BY ITS MANAGING
               PARTNER, SHAJAN ANTONY, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY,
               CHETTUNGAL HOUSE, ANGAMALI, ERNAKULAM.

               BY ADVS.
               SHRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN
               SMT.PHILIA KOSHY

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE HOTEL AND RESTAURANTS APPROVAL AND CLASSIFICATION
               COMMITTEE (HRACC)
               MINISTRY OF TOURISM, C1-HUTMENTS, DALHOUSIE ROAD, NEW
               DELHI 110 001, REP.BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

      2        THE HOTEL AND RESTAURANTS APPROVAL AND CLASSIFICATION
               COMMITTEE (HRACC) (SOUTH)
               REP.BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR AND CONVENER, SOUTHERN
               REGIONAL OFFICE, 154, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI 600 002.

      3        STATE OF KERALA
               REP.BY SECRETARY, TOURISM DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
               SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

               R1-2 BY SRI.GIRISH KUMAR.V., CGC


               SMT.VINITHA.B, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.2536 OF 2021(N)

                                          2


                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 16th day of February 2021

The petitioner is running a Hotel and is

aggrieved by the delay in passing orders on

classification, despite the inspection conducted as

early as on 24.11.2020 for which Exts.P3 and P4

notices were issued. The petitioner points out

that, even after several requests made, the

respondents are not taking any action and the

details are not up loaded in the website.

2. I have already considered similar cases

wHere inspection was conducted and results were not

uploaded in the website. In W.P.(C)No.28735/2020,

filed by a similarly situated petitioner, the

respondents have filed a counter affidavit in which

it was stated that there was a CBI raid and the

records relating to inspection of Hotels conducted

during the period from 18.11.2020 to 24.11.2020 are

not traceable. It was also stated that the CBI has

not shared any details of the documents seized by WP(C).No.2536 OF 2021(N)

it from the officer arrested. In the above

circumstances, I had already directed the

respondents to conduct a fresh inspection. In the

present case also, since the inspection was during

the relevant period relating to which CBI had

conducted the raid, there shall be a direction to

the respondents 1 and 2 to see that an inspection

is conducted and the proceedings for issuance of

certificates of classification are finalised in

accordance with law and to see that the report is

uploaded in the website at the earliest, at any

rate, within a period of one month.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA JUDGE DM WP(C).No.2536 OF 2021(N)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE UPLOADED DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATUS REPORT IN RESPECT OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION NOTICE DATED 17.11.2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.11.2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.1.2021 IN W.P.(C).NO.28735/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE