Kerala High Court
Laila Lathief vs Kothamangalam Municipality on 6 January, 2023
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 16TH POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 8618 OF 2012
PETITIONERS:
1 LAILA LATHIEF
AGED 47 YEARS
W/O.ABDUL LATHIEF, AYYARIL HOUSE, ERAMALLOOR P.O.,
KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
2 M.P.SUBAIR
AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.PAREED, MUNDACKAL HOUSE, THANKALAM,
KOTHAMANGLAAM-686 691.
3 RAMLA SYED MUHAMMED
AGED 42 YEARS, W/O.SYED MUHAMMED, KARAYIL HOUSE,
PINDIMANA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM.
4 M.M.MYTHEEN
AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.MEERAN, MAYAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
CHERUVATTOOR P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
5 A.A.BAVA
AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.ALIKUNJU, ANCHAERI PULICKAL HOUSE,
CHERUVATTOOR P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
6 M.A.ALI
AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.ENATHI, MONIKKATTIL HOUSE,
CHERUVATTOOR P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
7 JAHFAR
AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.MYTHEEN, MACHINGAL HOUSE, OLAKARA
P.O., THIROORANGADI, MALAPPURAM-676 306.
8 P.M.SALIM
AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.MEERAN, PONNAPPALA HOUSE, ADIVADU,
PALLALRIMANGALAM P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM.
9 P.M.ALIYAR
AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.MEERAN, PARAMBIL HOUSE, KOOVALLOOR
P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM-686 671.
10 ADDL. PETITIONER NO.10 IMPLEADED:
SYED MOHAMMED
AGED 67 YEARS, SON OF AHAMMED MOIDEEN, PADINJATTUM
KARAYIL HOUSE, COMPANYPADY, NELLIKUZHY P.O
(ADDL. PETITIONER NO.10 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD
28.09.2022 IN I.A-1/2022)
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
:2:
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.)
SMT.S.AMBILY
SRI.BOBBY THOMAS
SRI.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL
SRI.THOMAS JAMES MUNDACKAL
SRI.TONY THOMAS INCHIPARAMBIL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE,
KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
2 THE SECRETARY
KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE,
KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
3 THE KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN SRI.K.P.BABU, MUNICIPAL
OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM-686 691.
4 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ALEX M.THOMBRA
SHRI.JOICE GEORGE, SC, KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY
SMT.T.M.BINITHA
SMT.S.JANAKI
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.01.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).11896/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
:3:
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
---------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). Nos. 8618 of 2012
& 11896 of 2013
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of January, 2023.
JUDGMENT
The writ petitions are filed by one and the same persons, who
are licencees of the buildings owned by the Kothamangalam
Municipality, respondent No.4.
2. The issue raised in both the writ petitions is in respect of
the cancellation of the decision of the Municipal Council to grant
license in favour of the petitioners, and the consequential action
initiated to evict the petitioners from the buildings in question.
Therefore, I have heard them together and proposed to pass this
common judgment.
3. In fact, a detailed deliberation of the matter is not required
also, since the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality
submitted that the Municipal Council is prepared to re-consider the
issue, dehors the cancellation of the resolution passed by the
Municipal Council earlier.
4. It is also pointed out that on the basis of Exhibit P17
minutes of the meeting dated 15.04.2013 declining to renew the
licenses, coercive action was initiated as per Exhibits P18 to P26
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
notices, which are challenged in W.P.(C) 11896 of 2013. The
learned senior counsel for the petitioners also submitted that Exhibit
P4 resolution dated 16.11.2011, which was the original challenge in
W.P.(C) 8618 of 2012, by which the earlier resolution in favour of
the licensees was canceled, is challenged before the Government by
virtue of Section 57 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, and a stay
was granted by the Government, as is evident from Exhibit P5 dated
08.12.2011 in W.P.(C) No. 8618 of 2012, which according to the
learned senior counsel is still pending. Even though a renewal was
sought thereafter, they were refused, and consequently
apprehending forcible eviction, first writ petition was filed. In W.P.
(C) No. 8618 of 2012, an interim order was passed on 04.04.2012
directing the appropriate authority of the Municipality to consider
the applications for renewal.
5. Pursuant to the same, applications were considered;
however, it was rejected, consequent to which the said writ petition
was amended and Exhibit P15 order dated 28.04.2012 produced in
W.P.(C) No. 8618 of 2012 was challenged.
6. I have heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioners
Sri. K.K. Chandran Pillai assisted by Adv. Lakshmi Anil, learned
Standing Counsel for the Municipality Sri. Joice George, learned
Senior Government Pleader Sri. Joby Joseph, and perused the
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
pleadings and materials on record. In fact, no counter affidavit is
filed by the Municipality. Anyhow, in view of the resolution passed
by the Municipal Council, which is under challenge before the
Government, the Municipal Council has to consider the applications
for renewal. This is more so in view of the powers conferred on the
Municipality under Rule 7 of the Kerala Municipality (Acquisition and
Disposal of property) Rues, 2000, dealing with the issue granting
licenses.
7. Now, 10 years have elapsed since the filing of the writ
petitions and since the learned Standing Counsel for the
Municipality submitted that the renewal applications would be
considered in accordance with law, dehors the orders passed and
discussed above, these writ petitions are disposed of with the
following directions:
1) The petitioners are directed to file applications before the
Secretary of the Municipality seeking renewal of the licences
within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment, which shall be transmitted by the Secretary to the
Council without any delay for consideration.
2) If any such applications are filed, it shall be considered by
the Municipal Council at the earliest and at any rate within
three weeks thereafter. If any license fee is due from the
petitioners to the Municipality, the petitioners shall pay the
same and produce the receipt along with the applications for
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
renewal.
3) The Municipal Council shall consider the applications dehors
the pendency of the challenge made against the cancellation
of the resolution before the Government by the petitioners;
and the earlier dismissal of the applications consequent to the
interim directions issued by this court which are under
challenge in W.P.C. 8618 of 2012 and the coercive action
initiated against the petitioners to evict them from the
premises.
4) The interim order granted by this Court on 07.05.2013 in
W.P.(C) No. 11896 of 2013 staying all proceedings pursuant
to Exhibits P17 to P26 notices shall continue to be in force till
a decision is taken as directed above. Thereafter, the
petitioners will be guided by the orders so passed by the
authority as directed above.
sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8618/2012
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 27.09.2010 ISSUED TO
THE 7TH PETITIONER FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 27.09.2010 ISSUED TO
THE 4TH PETITIONER FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 28.10.2010 BETWEEN
THE 1ST PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED
16.11.2011 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08.12.2011 ISSUED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 1ST PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 2ND PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 3RD PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 4TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 5TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 6TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 7TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 8TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.03.2012 ISSUED TO
THE 9TH PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 28.04.2012 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
True Copy
PS To Judge.
rv
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11896/2013
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
P1 EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 27/9/2010
ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER FROM THE IST
RESPONDENT
P2 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 27/9/2010
ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER FROM THE IST
RESPONDENT
P3 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 28/10/2010
BETWEEN THE IST PETITIONER AND IST RESPONDENT
P4 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE
MEETING DATED 16/11/2011 OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
P5 EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 8/12/2011
ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
P6 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE IST PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P7 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P8 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P9 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P10 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 5TH PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P11 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 6TH PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P12 EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P13 EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 8TH PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P14 EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24/3/2012
ISSUED TO THE 9TH PETITIONER BY THE IST
RESPONDENT
P15 EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 4/4/2012
PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 8618/12 B
P16 EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 28/4/2012
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
W.P.(C) No. 8618/2012 & 11896/2013
P17 EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE
MEETING DATED 15/4/2013 OF THE MUNICIPAL
COUNCIL
P18 EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
IST PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P19 EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
2ND PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P20 EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
3RD PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P21 EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
4TH PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY.
P22 EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
5TH PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P23 EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
6TH PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P24 EXHIBIT P24 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
7TH PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P25 EXHIBIT P25 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
8TH PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
P26 EXHIBIT P26 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
9TH PETITIONER BY THE MUNICIPALITY DATED
29/4/2013
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
True Copy
PS To Judge.
rv
