Shihabudheen Ibnu Sayed M.P vs Ramanattukara Municipality
2022 Latest Caselaw 6152 Ker

WP(C) NO. 23415 OF 2021                   1



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
        WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                           WP(C) NO. 23415 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
           SHIHABUDHEEN IBNU SAYED M.P.
           AGED 46 YEARS
           S/O SAIDALAVI, PARAMBIL HOUSE, FAROOK COLLEGE
           P.O.RAMANATTUKARA KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 632.

               BY ADVS.
               K.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ
               AMARNATH R LAL


RESPONDENT/S:
     1     RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY
           PARAMMAL ROAD, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 362.

      2        THE SECRETARY
               RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY, PARAMMAL ROAD, RAMANATTUKARA,
               KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 362.

      3        HEALTH INSPECTOR,
               RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY, PARAMMAL ROAD, RAMANATTUKARA,
               KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 362.

      4        AMINAKUTTY,
               AGED 66 YEARS
               XX

      5        YUNUS K.T,
               AGED 40 YEARS
               FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN, KUNIYIL THAIKKANDI, RAMANATTUKARA
               P.O.KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 362.

               BY ADVS.SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP
               P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH, SC R1 to R3
               SADIK ISMAYIL, R4
               P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ-R5

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 23415 OF 2021                     2




                         P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   --------------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C.) No. 23415 of 2021
                      --------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 1st day of June, 2022


                                JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers :

"1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction or order directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders in exhibit P6 application after conducting physical inspection on the premisses which the petition took the same on rent from the fourth respondent.

2. Direct the second respondent to take appropriate action against the fifth respondent who obtained renewed license by plying fraud and to cancel the license if any issued to the fifth respondent.

3. Issue any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case."[SIC]

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though

Ext.P6 application is filed for getting license to conduct a

coolbar/bakery/stationery/mobile and photostat shop, the same

is not considered. According to the petitioner, the same was

filed on 23.9.2021 and no orders are passed. It is stated that

the Municipality issued Ext.P7 in which it is stated that a

license is issued to one Yunus K.T for conducting business in

room No.7/952 (Old No.3/677). According to the petitioner, he

is conducting the business and not Mr.Yunus K.T.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

I also heard the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.

4 and 5.

4. It is an admitted fact that Ext.P6 application for

license is pending before the Panchayat. According to the

Panchayat, another person is conducting business in room

No.7/952 and it is the 5th respondent. Hence Ext.P6 was not

considered. But the petitioner says that he is conducting the

business and if an inspection is conducted by the Panchayat

authorities, the same will be clear. I do not want to decide this

issue. Since Ext.P6 application is pending before the

Municipality, there can be a direction to the Municipality to

consider the same, after giving an opportunity of hearing to

the petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Before passing

orders, the officers of the Municipality will inspect the

premises with notice to the petitioner and respondent Nos. 4

and 5.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the

following directions :

1. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P6

application, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner and respondent Nos.4 and 5 as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. Before passing final orders in Ext.P6 application, the 2 nd

respondent or his authorised officer will inspect the shop

in question and the inspection report also will be

considered while deciding Ext.P6 application.

SD/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23415/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RENT AGREEMENT DATED 17.8.2021 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE FOURTH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DATED 23.9.2021 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CARD DATED 28.8.,2021 ISSUED BY THE FOOD SAFETY AND SLANDERED AUTHORITY OF INDIA

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE HEALTH CARD DATED 22.9.2021 ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE RAMANATTUKARA.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 25.9.2021 ISSUED BY THE APPROVED LABORATORY

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 23.9.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29.9.2021 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER