Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 5TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 30654 OF 2022 PETITIONER:
THAREEQ ANWAR AGED 37 YEARS S/O. SRI.JAFFAR C.A., PROPRIETOR, M/S.ADF TRADERS, BUILDING NO.67/6110 (OLD NO.40/3557) BROADWAY, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
BY ADVS.
ZAKIR HUSSAIN K.A.SANJEETHA RESPONDENTS:
1 KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION CORPORATION OFFICE, PARK AVENUE, P.B.NO.1016, KOCHI - 682 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 SECRETARY, KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE, PARK AVENUE, P.B.NO.1016, KOCHI - 682 011.
3 C.U.BABY, AGED 70 YEARS W/O.LATE SRI.P.U.JOSE, PULIKKOTTIL HOUSE, 48/2498 A-24, CHOICE PARK, PERANDOOR ROAD, ELAMAKKARA P.O., KOCHI - 682 026.
BY ADV SHRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, SC, KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.30654 OF 2022 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 27th day of September, 2022 The petitioner, who is running business in dry fruits, spices, bakery items, garments, etc., is before this Court aggrieved by the refusal of the 1st respondent-Corporation to grant licence to the petitioner to run the garments shop.
2.
The petitioner states that Ext.P5 application was submitted by the petitioner on 03.02.2022 seeking issuance of licence to run business in dry fruits, spices, bakery items and garments. The 1st respondent-Corporation granted licence only to run the business in dry fruits, spices and bakery items.
The petitioner's application for running business in garments was not allowed by the Corporation.
3.
Aggrieved by the refusal, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P9 representation to the 2nd respondent- Secretary to the Municipal Corporation requesting to issue necessary licence for doing business in ready-made garments also. Unless the 2nd respondent-Secretary to the Municipal
WP(C) NO.30654 OF 2022 3 Corporation considers the application, the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and untold hardship, contends the petitioner.
4.
Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and opposed the writ petition. The Standing Counsel pointed out that the petitioner was originally issued a licence only to do business in dry fruits, spices and bakery items as evidenced by Ext.P1. The landlord of the shop room where the petitioner is doing his business, has raised dispute in this matter and rent control proceedings are also pending.
5.
Based on the complaint made by the landlord, the Corporation has issued Ext.P7 notice pointing out that the business in garment being run by the petitioner, is without any licence and furthermore, the petitioner is permitting parking of vehicles on the slabs in front of the shop causing obstructions to the vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1
WP(C) NO.30654 OF 2022 4 and 2. In view of the nature of the relief to be granted in the writ petition, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with.
7.
It is true that the petitioner was originally issued with a licence to run business only in dry fruits, spices and bakery items. However, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 application on 03.02.2022 to issue licence for doing business in garments also. Ext.P5 application has not been rejected by a speaking order. Ext.P5 being a statutory application, the respondent-Corporation is bound to consider the application for issuance of licence in respect of business in garments also.
8.
Be that as it may, the petitioner has now preferred Ext.P9 representation to the 2nd respondent-Secretary to the Corporation seeking to issue necessary licence for conducting the business in ready-made garments also along with the business of dry fruits, spices, bakery items, etc. in the shop room. In view of Ext.P9 representation, this Court is of the view that no adjudication in the matter is required at this stage in the writ petition and it will be sufficient that the
WP(C) NO.30654 OF 2022 5 2nd respondent-Secretary to the Corporation or any other competent Officer considers Ext.P9 representation submitted by the petitioner.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-Secretary to the Corporation or any other competent authority to consider Ext.P9 representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent, if the representation is pending.
Sd/- N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk
WP(C) NO.30654 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30654/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LICENCE DATED 28/09/2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE BUILDING.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GENERAL REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE (GST) NO.32AKSPJ2539HIZ2 ISSUED BY THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 25/08/2021 IN O.S. NO. 655 OF 2021 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 03/02/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 21/02/2022 SHOWING THE REMITTANCE FOR THE RENEWAL OF LICENCE FEE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 7.2.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 02/03/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10/08/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 10/08/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL