T.K.Khaleel vs The Secretary, District Tourism ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 13566 Ker

Kerala High Court

T.K.Khaleel vs The Secretary, District Tourism ... on 24 May, 2024

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.

     FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1946

                   WP(C) NO. 14736 OF 2018

PETITIONER/S:


          T.K.KHALEEL
          AGED 55 YEARS
          S/O.LATE ABDULLA,SOOPY HOUSE, ACHARATH ROAD,P.O,.
          TEMPLE GATE, THALASSERY.
          BY ADV SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF


RESPONDENT/S:


    1     THE SECRETARY, DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL,
          KANNUR
    2     THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
          DESTINATION MANAGEMENT COUNCIL, SEA VIEW PARK,
          THALASSERY-670101.
    3     THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY
          THALASSERY, RERPESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-670101.
    4     ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED MUNEER N.M
          AGED 35 YEARS
          S/O ABULLA HAJI, NAJATH MANZIL, CHOCKI P.O., KANNUR-
          670672. (ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
          05/10/2018 IN IA.03/2018)
          BY ADVS.
          K.M.ANEESH
          K.SANTHOSH KUMAR (KALIYANAM)
          ADARSH KUMAR
          DILEEP CHANDRAN
          SHASHANK DEVAN


          SRI. K. M. FAISAL, G. P.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.14736 of 2018
                                   2



                         EASWARAN S. , J.
                       -------------------------
                    W.P.(C) No.14736 of 2018
                  -----------------------------------
               Dated this the 24th day of May 2024

                              JUDGMENT

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking

a direction or declaration that the petitioners are entitled to re-occupy

the building owned by respondents 1 and 2.

2. Though various contentions on merits have been raised in the

present writ petition, this Court is of the considered view that nothing

further survives in the writ petition in the light of the interim order

dated 14.11.2018, wherein, it is specifically mentioned by this Court

that the license period has expired on 01.5.2017. It is also stated that

fresh auction proceedings were conducted, and the additional 4th

respondent is the successful bidder.

In the said circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed as

infructuous.

Sd/-

EASWARAN S., JUDGE NS