Narayanan vs The Land Revenue Commissioner
2022 Latest Caselaw 2935 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                         WP(C) NO.18791 OF 2021
PETITIONER :-

             NARAYANAN,
             S/O.THALAKKAL PARU,
             KARUVANCHERY, NEELESWARAM, KASARGOD DISTRICT.

           BY ADVS.
           K.MOHANAKANNAN
           H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)


RESPONDENTS :-

     1       THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER
             PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, MUSEUM ROAD, OPPOSITE ZOO,
             VIKHAS BHAVAN P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
             KERALA-695 033.

     2       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             KASARGOD CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR,
             KASARAGOD-671 123.

     3       THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
             CIVIL STATION, KASARAGOD-671 123.

     4       THE TAHSILDAR
             KOCHI-PANVEL HIGHWAY, HOSDURG,
             KANHANGAD, KERALA-671 315.

             BY SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, SR.GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   16.03.2022,   THE    COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.18791 OF 2021

                                  -: 2 :-


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 16th day of March, 2022

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"i) To issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P11 and quash the same.

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioner to establish an emergency exit/door as shown in Ext.P10 plan and renew the Explosive licence on submitting a completion certificate within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner had been conducting a shop selling fire works

from the year 2002 onwards as evident from Ext.P1 licence. It is

submitted that the licence is renewed from year to year. It is

stated that when the petitioner had sought renewal of the licence,

the Additional District Magistrate had required that a separate exit

and circuit breaker are to be provided for considering the request

for renewal. By Ext.P7 judgment, the petitioner was required to

file an affidavit that he will comply with the directions and the

licence was directed to be renewed. The petitioner submitted

Ext.P8 affidavit and the licence was renewed. However, by WP(C) NO.18791 OF 2021

Ext.P11 proceedings dated 8.7.2021, the application for renewal

submitted by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the

emergency exit door and the circuit breaker are not installed as

stated in the affidavit.

4. The learned Government Pleader submits, on

instructions, that this Court had directed the renewal of the

petitioner's licence on the petitioner submitting an affidavit that

separate circuit breaker and emergency exit would be provided by

the petitioner. It is submitted that though an affidavit to that effect

had been submitted by the petitioner before the Additional District

Magistrate, the said circuit breaker and emergency exit were not

provided by the petitioner, which resulted in Ext.P11.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

circuit breaker and the emergency exit will be provided by the

petitioner in the existing premises. It is submitted that by Ext.P10,

the petitioner had submitted a revised plan for the emergency exit,

but the same was not considered. It is submitted that the request

of the petitioner for renewal of licence is liable to be considered at

the earliest, in the light of Ext.P10.

6. Having considered the contentions advanced and in view

of the fact that the petitioner has produced Ext.P10 plan showing

an emergency exit and according to the petitioner, a circuit WP(C) NO.18791 OF 2021

breaker has been provided, I am of the opinion that Ext.P3 requires

a reconsideration in the light of Ext.P10.

There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 3 rd

respondent to accept Ext.P10 plan submitted by the petitioner,

conduct a site inspection and to reconsider the application

submitted by the petitioner for renewal of licence, at the earliest,

at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date on which

the petitioner submits a compliance report with regard to the

undertaking given in Ext.P8 affidavit.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/21.3.2022 WP(C) NO.18791 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18791/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE LICENCE DATED 10.12.2002.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 12.2.2017.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF LICENCE DATED 28.12.2018.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN RECEIPT DATED 22.12.2020.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE ENDORSEMENT MADE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY GIREESAN UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, WITH REPLY GIVEN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 29/07/2020.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT PETITION NO.3300/2021 DATED 8/4/2021.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 12.04.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE OLD SITE PLAN SUBMITTED ON 18.10.2000 BY THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED NIL.

Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.

DCKSGD/6200/2019/D5/K.DIS DATED 8/7/2021 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE EXPLOSIVE RULES 2008.

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE BUILDING AND ROOM.