Allowed

Ouseph Ulahannan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Mar 2007WP(C)/2932/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the writ petition challenging the validity of a communication by the Panchayat Secretary without informing the President. Relying on a precedent regarding market license, the Court directed the Panchayat to issue a licence to the petitioner and quashed the tribunal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P12 quashed; direction issued to 3rd respondent to grant market licence to petitioner; proceedings before Tribunal quashed.

Ouseph Ulahannan Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2007 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1928

¶5

WP(C).No. 2932 of 2006(Y)

PETITIONER:

OUSEPH ULAHANNAN, S/O.OUSEPH, AGED 72 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHERATHU, KALLARA (VAIKOM), KALLARA SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.B.GOPAKUMAR

¶11

SMT.CHINCY GOPAKUMAR

SRI.ASWIN GOPAKUMAR

SRI.ANWIN GOPAKUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (J) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

R.INDIRA DEVI, UNDER SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (J) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶18

KALLARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESETNED BY ITS SECRETARY, KALLARA SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM DIST.

¶19

S.BIJU, SECRETARY, KALLARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KALLRA SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶20

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, KOTTAYAM.

¶21

THE PRESIDENT, KALLARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KALLARA P.O.

¶22

BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR)(R3)

¶23

SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM SRI.V.K.SUNIL(R6)

¶24

G.P. SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANSAR(R1 & R5)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶28

P1 SKETCH PREPARED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DT.22.12.03.

¶29

P2 JUDGMENT DT.4.6.03 IN OP.13531/03.

¶30

P3 JUDGMENT IN WPC.17826, 23440 & 26046/03 DT.27.10.03.

¶31

P4 INTERIM ORDER DT.6.11.03 IN WA.1798/03.

¶32

P5 ORDER DT.5.11.90 ISSUED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS.

¶33

P6 INTERIM ORDER DT.6.4.04 IN WPC.11069/04.

¶34

P7 JUDGMENT IN WPC.11069/04 DT 25.5.04.

¶35

P8 FORM NO.III-NO.1/04-05.

¶36

P9 APPLICATION DT.6.4.05.

¶37

P10 RECEIPT DT 6.4.05.

¶38

P11 MINUTES BOOK DT 14.12.05.

¶39

P12 LETTER DT 5.1.06.

¶40

P13 NOTICE DT 20.1.06.

¶41

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶42

R1(A) GO(P)NO.52/04/LSGD DT.5.2.04.

¶43

TRUE COPY

¶44

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶45

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

¶46

W.P.(C) No. 2932 OF 2006

¶47

Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2007

¶48

JUDGMENT

¶49

Mr. V.K. Sunil Kumar, counsel for the Panchayat and its President submits that on the legal question raised in the Writ Petition whether it was proper and legal on the part of the Secretary to have communicated with the Government without informing the President, the Committee is in agreement with the petitioner. The 4^th respondent-Secretary and the Committee have no objection in issuing licence to the petitioner since the Panchayat does not have any other market and also since the petitioner's market was in existence for about more than five decades. Considering these submissions, Ext.P12 will stand quashed and there will be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to issue licence to the petitioner for the conduct of the market. I find that the issue raised is covered by the judgment reported in Maheswari V. Alappuzha Municipality [2003 (1) KLT 833]. The proceedings before the Tribunal, initiated on the basis of the reference made by the government covered by Ext.P13 are also quashed.

¶50

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶51

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶52

btt

¶53

WPC 2

Ouseph Ulahannan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ouseph Ulahannan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ambedkar Nagar Residents Association Vs State of Kerala

V.Thankappan Vaidyar Vs State of Kerala

T.K.Skariah Vs the K.S.R.T.C

Sadasivan Nair Vs the Kse Board

K.P.Asharaf Vs Mannancherry Grama Panchayath & Another

Prabhakaran.M. Vs National Thermal Power Corporation