Disposed

Xavier Thomas, v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

Kerala HC2 Mar 2023WP(C)/22294/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court in writ petition directed petitioner to file trade licence application within 10 days, stay proceedings under Ext.P5 notice, and order respondent to consider petitioner's reply and application within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to file trade licence application within 10 days; proceedings under Ext.P5 stayed; respondent to consider application and reply within one month.

Xavier Thomas, Vs Kochi Municipal Corporation — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 22294 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

XAVIER THOMAS, AGED 64 YEARS PROPREITOR OF R.X ELECTRONICS R/O D.NO. 39/4540(NEW NO. 4124), PADAMADAN BUILDINGS, M.G ROAD, PALLIMUKKU, ERNAKULAM. PIN: 682016. BY ADVS. K.B.PRADEEP HARISANKAR R JEEVAN KRISHNAKUMAR

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN- 682011, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2 THE HEALTH INSPECTOR, CIRCLE-17, OFFICE OF THE HEALTH INSPECTOR, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, PIN: 682011. BY ADV V.P.REJITHA (PUZHAKKALIDOM)SC

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

W.P.(C). No.22294 of 2022

: 2 :

VIJU ABRAHAM, J.

- - - - Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2023

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 notice, wherein the petitioner was intimated that he is running the shop without obtaining necessary licence from the respondent Corporation and he was directed to apply for a trade licence within 7 days on receipt of the notice, otherwise the respondent Corporation will take immediate steps to close down the shop.

¶18

The petitioner submits that he has filed Ext.P6 reply to Ext.P5 notice. It is further submitted that he is ready and willing to submit application for trade licence, but the respondent Corporation is not accepting his application stating that the same can be accepted only after finalising the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5.

¶19

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation submitted that if the petitioner files an application for trade licence, the same will be appropriately considered in accordance with law.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶21

W.P.(C). No.22294 of 2022 : 3 :

¶22

necessary application in this regard will be filed within a period of 10 days. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file an application for trade licence within a period of 10 days from today and the respondent Corporation shall consider Ext.P6 reply filed by the petitioner and the application submitted by the petitioner for trade licence as directed above, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of such application. Till a decision is taken in this regard as directed above, all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5 shall be kept in abeyance.

¶23

With the above said directions, the writ petition is disposed

¶24

of.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE

¶27

sm/

¶28

W.P.(C). No.22294 of 2022

¶29

: 4 :

¶30

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22294/2022

¶31

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶32

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL RECEIPT DATED 27-02-2003 SHOWING RECEIPT OF MONEY FOR LICENSE FEE FOR THE YEAR 2003-04.
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND FOR PROFESSIONAL TAX DATED 28-10-2003 IN RELATION TO CONDUCT OF BUSINESS IN BUILDING NO. 39/4540.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL RECEIPT DATED 30-03-2005 SHOWING RECEIPT OF MONEY FOR LICENSE FEE FOR THE YEAR 2005-06.
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL RECEIPT EVIDENCING SUCH RECEIPT DATED 08-022021.
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07-12-2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO EXT. P-5 DT. 09-12-2021 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT. 17-02-2020 FOR REMITTANCE OF PROPERTY TAX.

Xavier Thomas, v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xavier Thomas, v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

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

Sasidharan, Vs the Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Abdul Azeez Vs Adoor Municipality

Thankamma P P Vs State of Kerala

Laya Jose P.J. Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

O.Y. Pathrose, Vs District Panchayat

Aji Vs the Secretary