Disposed

Mohammed Musthafa A.K v. Perinthalmanna Municipality

Kerala HC12 Jul 2022WP(C)/4504/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the allotment of a room in a new market complex instead of the allotted Room No. 83. The Court directed the Secretary to consider the petitioner's representation within three weeks and defer allotment pending this decision.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P7 representation within three weeks after hearing, and deferred allotment of Room No. 83 subject to that decision.

Mohammed Musthafa A.K Vs Perinthalmanna Municipality — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

W.P.(C) NO.4504 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MOHAMMED MUSTHAFA A.K., AGED 55 YEARS, S/O KHALID, ACHUKOMBAN (H), CHEERATTAMANNA, VALAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. C.M. MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶9

P. ABDUL NISHAD

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY, PERITHALAMNNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 322 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

2 THE SECRETARY, PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY, PERITHALMNNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 322.

¶13

3 PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, PERITHALAMNNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 322 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

¶14

4 HANEEFA P., S/O ISMAIL, PATTANI (H), CHERAKKAPARAMABU P.O., ANGADIPPURAM, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 321.

¶15

R1-R3 SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC, PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY

¶16

SRI. N. KRISHNA PRASAD

¶17

R4 SRI. IMAM GRIGORIOS KARAT SMT. YOGAMAYA M.G.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

-2-

¶20

W.P.(C) NO.4504 OF 2021

¶21

P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶22

W.P. (C) No.4504 of 2021

¶23

Dated this the 12^th day of July, 2022

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

The above writ petition is filed with the following

¶26

prayers:-

¶27

"a) Call for the records leading up to Ext.P5 notice and quash the same by issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

¶28

b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1^st respondent to permit the petitioner to occupy Room No.83 in the newly constructed Modern Indoor Market Complex as per Exts.P1 and P2 agreements, within a time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

¶29

c) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7 representation submitted by the petitioner, within a time stipualted by this Hon'ble Court.

¶30

-3-

¶31

W.P.(C) NO.4504 OF 2021

¶32

d) Pass any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to issue and the petitioner may pray from time to time.” [SIC]

¶33

The petitioner was doing fish business in Room No.I-4 of the old fish market building under the 1^st respondent Municipality. The Municipality decided to construct a Modern Indoor Market and demolished the old fish market building, with a project to rehabilitate the existing fish vendors in the old fish market. According to the petitioner, Room No.83 in the new building was allotted to him as per Ext.P1 agreement. Ext.P2 rent agreement was executed and he paid half of the deposit amount as per the rent agreement. It is the case of the petitioner that now the Municipality issued notice to the petitioner to occupy Room No.103 in the new building instead of Room No.83. According to him, it is learned that Room No.83 was allotted to the 4^th respondent, who, according to the petitioner, is not an existing fish vendor in the old market building. Aggrieved

¶34

-4-

¶35

W.P.(C) NO.4504 OF 2021

¶36

by the same, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 before the 2^nd respondent. But when there is no response, this writ petition is filed.

¶37

Heard the counsel for the petitioner, the Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality and the counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent.

¶38

When this writ petition came up for consideration on 24.02.2021, this Court observed that allotment of Room No.83 shall be subject to the result of the writ petition. The petitioner submitted a representation narrating his grievance, as evident by Ext.P7. According to me, his representation can be directed to be considered by the Municipality within a time frame. Till then, if the Room is not already allotted to the 4^th respondent, the allotment can be deferred.

¶39

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶40

i) The 2^nd respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 representation, as

¶41

-5-

¶42

W.P.(C) NO.4504 OF 2021

¶43

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 4^th respondent. ii) If Room No.83 is not allotted to anybody so far, the allotment will be subject to the decision to be taken by the 2^nd respondent in Ext.P7.

¶44

iii) The petitioner and the 4^th respondent are free to raise all their contentions before the 2^nd respondent.

¶45

Sd/- P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶46

bpr

¶47

-6-

¶48

W.P.(C) NO.4504 OF 2021

¶49

APPENDIX

¶50

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶51

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 9.7.2020. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF RENT AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE MUNICIPALITY AND THE PETITIONER DATED 9.7.2020. EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.6.2020. EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY DATED 1.7.2020. EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 8.1.2021. EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF ROOM OWNERS IN THE NEW MARKET BUILDING. EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 20.1.2021. ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF ALLOTMENT. ANNEXURE R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY TO THE PETITIONER. ANNEXURE R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Mohammed Musthafa A.K v. Perinthalmanna Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Musthafa A.K v. Perinthalmanna Municipality

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

Ajikumar Vs Mannar Grama Panchayath

George V.D. Vs the Secretary

State Vs M/S.Kolickanam Estate

Sumi Vs State of Kerala

Ranjith T.Das Vs the District Collector

Shahubanath Vs Mr. Rethu T. Das