Two-judge bench allowed a writ appeal against the dismissal of a petition challenging a notice to close a medical shop. While affirming that a license was mandatory and the notice was justified, the court directed a six-month stay on the notice's execution.
Stay of the notice to close the medical shop for a further period of six months from the date of the judgment.
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 ANTONY DOMINIC &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2015/30TH VAISAKHA, 1937
W.A.No. 715 of 2009 IN WP(C).38062/2008
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 38062/2008 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 09-02-2009
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
P.P.JOSE, AGED 50, S/O. PULIKKAN PORINCHU, OLARIKARA DESOM, ARANATTUKARA VILLAGE THRISSUR TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
R,R2,3 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN R,R2,3 BY ADV. SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR R,R2,3 BY ADV. SMT.KRIPA ELIZABETH MATHEWS R,R2,3 BY ADV. SRI.V.N.HARIDAS R BY SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS R SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN, SC FOR CORPORATION GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV.ROSE MICHAEL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC & SHAJI P CHALY, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Writ Appeal No.715 of 2009
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of May, 2015
JUDGMENT
Antony Dominic, J.
The appellant filed writ petition challenging Ext.P9, a notice issued by the third respondent requiring the appellant to close down his medical shop on the ground that the same is functioning without a licence issued under the D & O Rules. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing, it was conceded before the learned Single Judge that the appellant was not in possession of a current licence issued by the second respondent. Taking note of the above, the writ petition was dismissed. It is this judgment which is under challenge before us.
Writ Appeal No.715 of 2009
: 2 :
Standards Act, 2006') and as the appellant is not in possession of either of these, the third respondent cannot be faulted for having issued Ext.P9. The fact that the appellant possesses a licence issued under the Drugs Act, does not alter the situation to his advantage in any manner. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere either with the judgment under appeal or Ext.P9.
Subject to the above, appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY
JUDGE
jes
//True Copy//
P.A. to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the impugned order dismissing the previous writ petition regarding the closure of the medical shop.
Whether the appellant is entitled to a temporary stay on the closure notice given the long-standing presence of the shop.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P.P.Jose
The State of Kerala
The Thrissur Municipal Corporation
The Health Officer, Thrissur Municipal Corporation
Abdul Ameen
Nazeem Ameen
Anton Dominic
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
