Petitioners approached the writ court seeking a direction for the Grama Panchayat to consider their representation regarding license renewal and encroachment issues, despite pending consideration since 2013.
Direction to the second respondent to consider the representation after hearing all parties and pass orders within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
SATURDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/29TH BHADRA, 1936
WP(C).No. 17974 of 2014 (V)
PETITIONERS:
1. N.SHAJAHAN, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.NUT MUHAMMED ABBAS, PROPRIETOR, SHAJI TRADERS MARKET ROAD, MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR P O IDUKKI DIST-685612
2. ABDUL KAREEM S/O.ISMAIL, R/A.SHYLA MANZIL , NEAR PWD REST HOUSE MUNNAR P O, IDUKKI DIST, PIN-685612
BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENTS:
1. MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT MUNNAR P O, IDUKKI DIST, PIN-685612 REP BY ITS SECRETARY
2. THE SECRETARY MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUNNAR P O IDUKKI DIST-685612
3. TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LTD(ERSTWHILE TATA TEA LTD) REP BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE G H COMPOUND, MUNNAR P O, IDUKKI DIST-685612
4. SANKAR S/O.SAKARAIA, COCONUT MERCHANT, MARKET GATE MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR P O IDUKKI DIST, PIN-685612
5. ABDUL BARI S/O.IBRAHIM, PROVISION BUSINESS, MARKET GATE MUNNAR DAILY MARKET,MUNNAR P O IDUKKI DIST, PIN-685612
6. ANPARASAN S/O.MANI, GARLIC BUSINESS, MARKET GATE MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR P O IDUKKI DIST, PIN-685612
7. KATTURAJA S/O.DORAIRAJ, VEGITABLE MERCHANT, MARKET GATE MUNNAR DAILY MARKET,MUNNAR P O IDUKKI DIST, PIN-685612
R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI R4,R5,R6 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI R4,R5,R6 BY ADV. SMT.PREETHY R. NAIR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RKC
WP(C).No. 17974 of 2014 (V)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
P1:-TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE OF THE IST PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO 391/2011 OF DEVIKULAM S R O DTD 11/2/2011
P3:-TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND THE WIFE OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DTD 1/9/2008
P4:-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 25831/2012 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DTD 10/1/2013
P5:-TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DTD 28/1/2013
P6:-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 22/2/2013
P7:-PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ENCROACHMENTS IN FRONT OF THE SHOP ROOM OF THE PETITIONERS
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
R4(a): THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPTS OF STALL RENT PAID TO THE TATA TEA COMPANY.
R4(b): TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT FOR ICENCE FEE FOR THE YEAR 2006 AND 2007 AND PAID RS.482/- ISSUED BY THE MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH.
R4(c): THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SHOPS ROOMS
RKC
TRUE COPY
PA TO JUDGE.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
W.P.(C).No.17974 of 2014
Dated this the 20th day of September, 2014
JUDGMENT
The limited relief sought for by the petitioners is for a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass final orders on Ext.P5 representation submitted by them. Though the representation was submitted in January 2013, they complain that, no orders have been passed thereon till date.
clients are the persons who are likely to be affected by any decision that may be taken by the second respondent on Ext.P5. Therefore, it is necessary that they also are heard, before any final orders are passed.
this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to consider and pass final orders on Ext.P5.
This writ petition is therefore disposed of, directing the
2
W.P.(C).No.17974 of 2014
second respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners as well as respondents 4 to 7 and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
rkc.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ court should direct the Grama Panchayat to consider the petitioners' representation and pass final orders after hearing all concerned parties.
N.SHAJAHAN
ABDUL KAREEM
MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LTD
SANKAR
ABDUL BARI
K.SURENDRA MOHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
