Chinju vs Thrissur Municipal Corporation
2022 Latest Caselaw 6996 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                   WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2020
PETITIONER:

         CHINJU,
         AGED 29 YEARS,
         W/O. SUMESH, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. G3, TAPASYA
         UNIDESIGN, CIVIL LANE ROAD, AYYANTHOLE,
         THRISSUR 680 003.

         BY ADVS.
         P.B.KRISHNAN
         SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
         SRI.SABU GEORGE
         SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER
         SMT.B.ANUSREE
         SMT.MEERA P.


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR 680 001.

    2    HEALTH INSPECTOR,
         OLLUR ZONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL
         CORPORATION, OLLUR, THRISSUR 680 006.

    3    RANJITH KUMAR M.G.,
         AGED 41 YEARS,
         S/O. GANGADHARAN, MULLAKKAL HOUSE, ANCHERI P.O.,
         OLLUR, THRSSUR 680 006.

    4    REMADEVI P.O.,
         AGED 52 YEARS,
         W/O. LATE V. RAJU, VADAKARA KURUPPUTH,
         EALMTHURUTHY, KUTTANELLOOR P.O.,
         THRISSUR 680 014.
 W.P.(C) NO.7119 OF 2020         2



      5     MANJU RAJAGOPALAN,
            AGED 33 YEARS,
            W/O. RAJAGOPALAN T.N., THEKKUMTHALA HOUSE, NEAR
            KANDAKARNANVELI STOP, NORTH PARAVUR,
            ERNAKULAM 683 513.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION
            SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
            SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)


    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
  17.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) NO.7119 OF 2020                3




                      P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                     ==================
                       W.P.(C) No.7119 of 2020
                     ==================
                  Dated this the 17th day of June, 2022

                                 JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

"1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order in the nature thereof directing respondent No.1 to strictly adhere to the provisions contained in Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 while considering the application filed by respondent No.3 for trade license in shop room having Thrissur Corporation No.12/260 situated in 0.6 cents of land in Edakkunny Village.

2. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order in the nature thereof directing respondent No.1 to consider Ext.P8 representation after hearing the petitioner before considering the application filed by respondent No.3 for trade license in shop room having Thrissur Corporation No.12/260 situated in 0.6 cents of land in Edakkunny Village."

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4 th respondent,

who is the mother of the petitioner, without the consent of the

petitioner, purported to have let out the shop room to the 3 rd

respondent, in violation of the status-quo order of the Civil Court.

The application for trade licence filed by the 3 rd respondent to start

a hotel in the said room was not accepted by respondent Nos.1 and

2, is the case of the petitioner. The 3 rd respondent approached this

Court. This Court directed the 1st respondent to consider the

application after hearing all the co-owners and to take a decision.

The 1st respondent conducted hearing and no licence was issued.

The case of the petitioner is that now the 3 rd respondent has filed a

fresh application for licence to conduct the hotel in the very same

room before the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent is taking

hasty steps to grant the licence in favour of the 3 rd respondent

without the consent of the petitioner. Immediately, the petitioner

submitted representation before the 2 nd respondent requesting him

not to give any licence to the 3 rd respondent without the consent of

the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends that respondent Nos.1

and 2 may issue the licence to the 3 rd respondent without the

consent of the petitioner. The licence applied for by the 3 rd

respondent is a fresh one. According to the petitioner, as per the

mandate of Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, the

consent of the petitioner is pre-requisite for issue of a licence. As

the petitioner has not granted her consent, the 3 rd respondent has

no legal rights to aspire for licence from the 1 st respondent. Hence

this writ petition.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and

the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 5.

4. When this writ petition came up for consideration on

09.03.2022, this Court passed the following order:

"Sri.Santhosh P. Poduval, has taken notice for R-1 and R-2. Issue notice to R-3 to R-5 by special messenger returnable within 3 days.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly Ext.P-2 order dated 9.8.2019 rendered by the Munsiff's Court, Thrissur, granting status quo, it is ordered that respondents 1 and 2 shall not consider the grant of fresh licence sought for by R-3 in the subject property. The order will be in force for a period of ten days."

5. Admittedly a suit is pending before the Civil Court. Ext.P2

is the status-quo order. There is any violation of the same, the

petitioner has a remedy as per the Civil Procedure Code. The

petitioner is free to approach the Civil Court and get appropriate

orders in accordance with law. When the matter is seized by the

Civil Court, it is not proper on the part of this Court to invoke

jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. All the

contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition are left

open. The petitioner is free to agitate all these contentions before

the Civil Court.

With the above observation, this writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE DSV/18.06.2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7119/2020

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 09.08.2019 IN O.S. NO. 2421 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, THRISSUR. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 09.08.2019 IN I.A. NO. 13378 OF 2019 IN O.S. NO. 2421 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL MUSIFF'S COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 14.08.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, K.M. GOPAN IN I.A. NO. 13377 OF 2019 IN O.S. NO. 2421 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 09.08.2019.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION 19.09.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 28.09.2019 GIVEN BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, ULLUR POLICE STATION. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.10.2019 IN WPC NO. 26902 OF 2019.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.03.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENT NO.1 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICINE PRESCRIPTION & ADVICE DATED 16.02.2020 ISSUED FROM THE ELITE MISSION HOSPITAL, THRISSUR.

EXHIBIT R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT DATED 20.10.2018.

EXHIBIT R4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.152/2020 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR CITY DATED 17.02.2020.

EXHIBIT R4(d) TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.02.2020.