C.H.Muhammedkunhi vs Kannur Municipal Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 10546 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

     MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                        WP(C).No.7967 OF 2021(U)


PETITIONER/S:

                C.H.MUHAMMEDKUNHI
                AGED 48 YEARS
                S/O.ABDULLA, SAMEERA MANZIL, R.D.NAGAR P.O.,
                KELEGUDAI, KASARGOD.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
                SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
                SMT.D.S.THUSHARA
                SRI.H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)
                SMT.T.V.NEEMA

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         KANNUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
                REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANNUR - 670 017.

      2         HEALTH SUPERVISOR
                KANNUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ELAYAVOOR ZONAL OFFICE,
                ELAYAVOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 594.

                R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.M.MEENA JOHN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.7967 OF 2021(U)




                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 29th day of March 2021

The petitioner confines his relief for an expeditious

consideration of Ext P9 application submitted by him before

the 1st respondent seeking renewal of D & O licence. Though

as per Ext P10 the petitioner was required to provide certain

documents for consideration of the application, the same were

made available as is evident from Ext P11 submitted by the

petitioner before the Secretary of the Municipality. The

petitioner maintains that he had been conducting the business

on a deemed licence in terms of Section 449(6) of the Kerala

Municipalities Act for the previous year. I do not propose to

go into the merits of the contentions.

The writ petition is disposed of directing the secretary

of the municipality to consider Ext P9 application in

accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon,

expeditiously.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN

JUDGE VDV WP(C).No.7967 OF 2021(U)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KANNUR DATED 11/3/2008.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT PETITION NO.10069/2008 DATED 2/4/2008.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KANNUR DATED 2/4/2008.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28/9/2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.336/2010.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION ON 21/6/2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR WITH TYPED COPY.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE TAHSILDAR TO THE PETITIONER DATED 8/3/2021.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13/3/2021, SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 17/3/2021.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH ANNEXURES BEFORE THE MUNICIPALITY ON 17/3/2021.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/3/2021.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24/3/2021 WITH ANNEXURES.