Dismissed

Muhammed Iqbal, v. Konni Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC2 Nov 2021WP(C)/18412/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala set aside an order cancelling the petitioner's business licence, noting it was passed without a hearing. The Court remanded the matter to the Panchayat to reconsider the issue after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order (Ext.P4) is set aside, and the 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

Muhammed Iqbal, Vs Konni Grama Panchayat — Kerala HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

WP(C) NO. 18412 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶7

WP(C) NO. 18412 OF 2021

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

MUHAMMED IQBAL, AGED 48 YEARS S/O. ABDUL RAZAK, M/S. A.R. GIFT HOUSE, SAJIDA MANZIL, MANGARAM, KONNI 689 691.

¶10

BY ADVS. PHILIP T.VARGHESE THOMAS T.VARGHESE ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM V.T.LITHA K.R.MONISHA SHRUTHI SARA JACOB EBEE ANTONY ALEX THOMAS

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 KONNI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KONNI P.O. PATHANAMTHITTA 689 691.

¶13

2 THE SECRETARY, KONNI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KONNI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689 691.

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.V.K.SUNIL, SC FOR RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 18412 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J

¶20

W.P.(C.) No.18412 of 2021

¶21

Dated this the 2^nd day of November, 2021

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

¶24

“Issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext P3 notice and P4 order, scrutinize and quash the same;

¶25

i. Issue a direction restraining the respondents from interfering with the business of the petitioner conducted in accordance with Ext P2 license.

¶26

ii. Pass such other orders, interlocutory or otherwise, which are deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice; and

¶27

iii. Allow this Writ Petition(Civil) with costs.”

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 order. He was

¶29

granted Ext.P2 licence to sell essential commodities like provisions, milk, vegetables and fruits. It is the specific case of the petitioner that, without notice or intimation to the

¶30

WP(C) NO. 18412 OF 2021 3

¶31

petitioner, the respondents cancelled Ext.P2 licence as per Ext.P4 order. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated her contentions in the writ petition. The counsel submitted that Ext.P4 is an order passed without hearing the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submitted that the petitioner was given licence to do business in stationery items. During the Covid season, the petitioner with an intention to open his shop obtained Ext.P2 licence misleading the Panchayat to the effect that, provisional items are also sold in his shop.

¶34

I considered the contentions of the petitioner and the respondents. It is an admitted case that Ext.P4 is an order passed without hearing the petitioner. The main reason for cancelling the licence is that during the Covid lockdown period, the petitioner obtained Ext.P2 licence misleading the Panchayat. Whatever that may be, admittedly, Ext.P4 is an

¶35

WP(C) NO. 18412 OF 2021 4

¶36

order passed, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Now, the Covid situation already changed. I think the matter can be reconsidered by the Panchayat, after giving

¶37

an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶38

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in the following

¶39

manner :

¶40

1. Ext.P4 order is set aside.

¶41

The 2^nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The 2^nd respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance to law.

¶42

SD/-

¶43

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶44

SKS

¶45

WP(C) NO. 18412 OF 2021

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18412/2021

¶48

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶49

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO. A6/3589/2021/626. ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR 2020-2021 DATED 10.11.2020. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO. A6/4216/2122/405 FOR 2021-2011 ISSUED BY IST RESPONDENT DATED 19.07. 2021. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. A2-01/2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 03.09.2021. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. A6-4216/2201 ISSUED BY THE KONNI GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 03.09.2021.

Muhammed Iqbal, v. Konni Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Iqbal, v. Konni Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Sunshine Plastics Vs M/S.Mahima Enterprises

Karmela Rani Training College, Kollam Vs State of Kerala

Subramanian K @ Nandu Vs the Secretary to Government, Public Works Department

Sabari Enterprises, Vs Superintending Engineer

Retnamma, Vs the Village Officer

Parukutty Amma and Another Vs the State of Kerala and Others