IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 32184 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.K.KOYA, S/O.AHAMMED KOYA HAJI, PAREKKAT, VELIMUKKU P.O., THIRURANGADI VIA, CHELARI MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SRI.SHIHAB, S/O.SAIDALAVI, AVITTILODI (H), CHELARI, VELIMUKKU P.O. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MOONNIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VELIMUKKU SOUTH P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. PIN - 676 317. 4. THE SECRETARY, MOONIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VELIMUKKU SOUTH P.O. MALAPPURAM DT.PIN - 676 317. 5. THE PRESIDENT, MOONNIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VELIMUKKU SOUTH P.O. MALAPPURAM DT. PIN - 676 317. ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN FOR R1. SHRI.HARISH R.MENON R3 TO R5. G.P. SHRI.M.R.SABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).No. 32184/2008. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THISCOURT IN W.P.C.NO.36169/04. P2. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY R3 DTD.9.2.05. P3. COPY OF THE REPORT DTD.9.2.05 BY R6 TO R3. P4. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE R3 TO R1. P5. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.15.2.05 TO R3. P6. COPY OF THE REPORT DTD.23.2.05 OF R6 TO R3. P7. COPY OF THE LETTER DTE.24.2.05 BY R3. P8. COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.3.6.03 BY R3. P9. PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SHOP. P10. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.19.10.07 TO R4. P11. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.21.11.07 TO R3. P12. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.14.7.03 TO R3. P13. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD.28.10.08 BEFORE THE C.J.M.COURT, PARAPPANANGADI. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.32184 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 4th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 1st respondent in conducting a chicken stall without a licence issued by the 3rd respondent-Panchayat. The counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the 1st respondent undertakes not to conduct the chicken stall without obtaining a valid licence from the Panchayat. This undertaking is recorded. Respondents 3 to 5 shall ensure that the said undertaking is promptly complied with by the 1st respondent. If there is any non-compliance, respondents 3 to 5 shall enforce closure of the chicken stall, if necessary with the police assistance. On production of a copy of this judgment before the concerned Police Officer, the Police shall also afford necessary police assistance to enforce the undertaking. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2