IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 11227 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- A. PUSHKARAN, AREEKARAYIL HOUSE, MULAKKULAM.P.O, VAIKOM TALUK, PROPRIETOR, DHARSHANA BRICKS, MULAKKULAM.P.O, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, MULAKKULAM, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. SECRETARY, MULAKKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PERUVA.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SC FOR PANCHAYATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 11227 OF 2010 (C) ===================== Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The complaint is regarding the alleged non consideration of Ext.P4 application made by the petitioner for renewal of his licence. 2. On the other hand, standing counsel appearing for the Panchayat submits that the petitioner had not produced the required document and that he did not pay the fee for renewal of licence and that therefore the application was rejected. However, even according to the counsel for the Panchayat, the rejection was conveyed to the petitioner only by certificate of posting and the petitioner submits that no such communication has been received. 3. As at present, since no document or evidence is available to indicate that rejection was conveyed to the petitioner, I feel it is only appropriate that the Panchayat should consider Ext.P4 application afresh giving the petitioner an opportunity to produce required documents and pay the renewal fee, for which, today is said to be the last date. WPC No.11227/10 :2 : 4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the petitioner shall pay the renewal fee payable on Ext.P4 today itself. If fee is paid as above, it will be open to the petitioner to produce the required documents, in which event, the Panchayat shall consider Ext.P4 within two weeks of production of such documents. In the meanwhile, subject to payment of fee as above, it is directed that status quo in so far as Ext.P6 will be maintained. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp