T.V.Hassan vs Kozhikode Corporation
2022 Latest Caselaw 8799 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
   THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 6666 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            T.V.HASSAN
            AGED 63 YEARS
            S/O. AHAMMED, FAREEDA MANZIL,
            COTTON MILLS ROAD P.O, THIRUVANNUR,
            KOZHIKODE 673 029

            BY ADV AVM.SALAHUDIN

RESPONDENTS:

    1       KOZHIKODE CORPORATION
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
            KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, KOZHILKODE 673 032

    2       COUNCIL OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS MAYOR, KOZHIKODE CORPORATION,
            KOZHIKODE 673 032

    3       SECRETARY
            KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, KOZHIKODE 673 032

            BY ADV SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P).


     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   07.07.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.6666/2021

                                  2




                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                    W.P.(C).No.6666 of 2021
             ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 07th day of July, 2022


                           JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext-P5 notice.

ii. To declare Ext-P5 notice illegal, arbitrary and issued without jurisdiction.

iii. To issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(SIC)

2. According to the petitioner, he is a licensee of the

room space (4.4 m² in extent) covered by Ext.P2 licence

agreement which expired on 02/06/2021. The licensed

premises covered by Ext.P2 was handed over to the petitioner

for selling of drinking water bottles. The said licensed W.P.(C).No.6666/2021

premises situate on the extreme western side of the parking

area known as Two Wheeler & Four Wheeler Stand Palayam

belonging to the Corporation. The petitioner is also a licensee

for the year 2020-21 for collecting the fee for parking the

vehicles in the 'Two Wheeler & Four Wheeler Stand Palayam.

It is the case of the petitioner that on 02/03/2021, the

petitioner received Ext.P5 notice with a direction to vacate the

licensed premises covered by Ext.P2 agreement within 7 days.

It is stated in the writ petition that if the petitioner is evicted

from the licensed premises on the basis of Ext.P5 notice, he

will be put to great hardship. Hence this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his

contentions in the writ petition. The learned counsel

submitted that there is no construction as alleged. The

learned counsel also submitted that some lenient view may be

taken because this is the only source of income to the

petitioner. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel

for the respondents submitted that the writ petition itself is

infructuous. The learned Standing Counsel also submitted W.P.(C).No.6666/2021

that the licence agreement is already expired on 02.06.2021.

The petitioner is continuing based on the interim order passed

by this Court.

5. This Court considered the contentions of the

petitioner and the respondents. It is true that the licence

agreement expired on 02.06.2021 and the petitioner is

continuing based on the interim order passed by this Court. I

perused Ext.P5 order. The main grievance of the petitioner is

that Ext.P5 is an order passed without giving an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner and without inspecting the premises

and giving notice to the petitioner. If that is the case, Ext.P5

can be set aside only for that purpose and there can be a

direction to the 1st respondent to inspect the premises with

notice to the petitioner and an opportunity of hearing also can

be given to the petitioner before passing final orders.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the

following manner:

1. Ext.P5 is set aside.

2. The 1st respondent is directed to give an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, before

proceeding further.

W.P.(C).No.6666/2021

3. Before passing final orders, an authorised

officer of the 1st respondent will inspect the

premises with notice to the petitioner.

4. I make it clear that the Corporation is free to

pass appropriate orders in accordance with

law.

sd/-

                                       P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                            JUDGE
 W.P.(C).No.6666/2021





                  APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6666/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1        THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 02-

12-2020 OF DEPOSIT OF RS. 6,000/- WITH THE RESPONDENT MADE BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE AGREEMENT DATED 03-12-2020 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 04-

12-2020 FOR PAYMENT OF RENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE LICENSED PREMISES. EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 12-

01-2021 FOR PAYMENT OF RS. 750/- FOR D AND O LICENSE EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22-

02-2021 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY SECRETARY ON BEHALF OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DIRECTING TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURES IN THE LICENSED PREMISES WITH 7 DAYS EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 06-

03-2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P5 EXHIBIT P7 PHOTOGRAPH NO 1 OF THE LICENSED PREMISES EXHIBIT P8 PHOTOGRAPH NO W OF THE LICENSED PREMISES EXHIBIT P9 PHOTOGRAPH NO 3 OF THE LICENSED PREMISES