Kerala High Court
K. Gopinathan vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14668 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
K. GOPINATHAN
AGED 92 YEARS
S/O. KOCHUKRISHNAN CHANNAR SECRETARY, OCHIRA TEMPLE
ADMINISTRATION BOARD REGISTRATION NO. Q82/59, OCHIRA P.O
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690526 RESIDING AT SREE RANGAM,
PUTHUPALLY P.O,, PIN - 690527
BY ADVS.
B.RENJITHKUMAR
CLARA SHERIN FRANCIS
SANGEERTHANA M.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691013
3 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691013
4 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691001
5 TAHSILDAR
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 690518
6 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
OCHIRA POLICE STATION, OCHIRA, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 690526
7 DISTRICT FIRE OFFICER
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691001
8 THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
THROUGH THE DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY ADV DEEPU LAL MOHAN
OTHER PRESENT:
GP - Ajith viswanathan
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C). No.14668 of 2024 :2:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
W.P.(C) No.14668 of 2024
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction
to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P2 application for renewal of
Ext.P1 licence within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner is the elected Secretary of Ochira Temple
Administration Board constituted for the administration of the
'Para Brahma Temple, Ochira. The 3rd respondent has issued an
explosive licence to the petitioner for conducting 'vedy vazhipadu'
in the said temple as per Ext.P1, for a period of three years. The
term of the said licence got expired on 31.03.2023, however, on
03.03.2023 the petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 application before
the 3rd respondent District Collector for renewal of the licence.
Along with Ext.P2, necessary fee for renewal of license was also
remitted by the petitioner as is evident from Ext.P3. The grievance
raised by the petitioner is that Ext.P2 application has not been
considered till date.
3. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions
submitted that the authority to renew the licence has been
designated as the Nodal Officer of the MCC and Law & Order of
the District and it is not possible to conduct further procedures like
site inspection & hearing related to transfer & renewal of the
licence and that is the reason for delay in considering the
application. A statement has been filed by the 8 th respondent on
the very same line.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he
has submitted the application for renewal of licence before the
expiry of the licence and going by Rule 112(5) of the Explosive
Rules, if the application for renewal reaches the renewing or
licensing authority on or before the date of expiry, the licence shall
be deemed to be in force until such date as the licensing authority
renews the licence or until an intimation that the renewal of the
licence is refused has been communicated to the applicant. Based
on the deeming provision in the said rule the petitioner would
submit that he is entitled to conduct 'vedy vazhipadu'.
5. The declaration of election etc., cannot be a reason for not
considering an application for renewal of licence as it is the
statutory duty of the 3rd respondent and an activity of routine
nature. Therefore, there will be a direction to the 3 rd respondent to
take up Ext.P2 application and dispose of the same in accordance
with law, at the earliest, at any rate within a period of two months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear
that the petitioner would be entitled for the benefit of Rule 112(5)
of the Explosive Rules, if the application has been submitted by the
petitioner before the 3rd respondent before the expiry of the term of
licence and that the same has not been considered and disposed of
and intimated to the petitioner.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sm/
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14668/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENCE ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
ON 18.5.2018 AND THE SAME RENEWED ON
29.9.2021 FOR A PERIOD OF 3 YEARS
Exhibi-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM FOR
RENEWAL OF THE SAID LICENCE BY THE
PETITIONER ON 3.3.2023
Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE E-CHALLAN SHOWING THE
REMITTANCE OF FEE OF RS. 6,100/- FOR
RENEWAL OF LICENCE DATED 2.5.2023
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
Annexure R8(a) The true copy of letter No.
DCKLM/1535/2023-M7 dated 08-04-2024
addressed by the 2nd Respondent to the
Chief Electoral Officer, Kerala
