IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2010 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7052 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SUSAN JOHN, 33/29-A2, KARIPPATT HOUSE, AMMU STORE LANE, PAVOOR ROAD, PADIVATTOM EAST, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682 024. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, COCHIN-682011. 2. P.F.JACOB, PAZHAMBILLY HOUSE, AMMU STORE LANE, PAVOOR ROAD, PADIVATTOM EAST, EDAPPALLY P.O., COCHIN-682 024. ADV. SRI.S.SUDHISH KUMAR FOR R2 SRI.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO.8521/10, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.7052/10 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT.15.09.2009 EXT.P2: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE OMBUDSMAN DT.11.12.2009. EXT.P3: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE DECISION NO.58 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT.26.11.2009. EXT.P4: TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE OMBUDSMAN DT.17.12.2009. EXTS OF R2 EXT.R2(1): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VETERINARY SURGEON. EXT.R2(2): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 11.5.2009 OF THE HEALTH OFFICER, COCHIN CORPORATION. EXT.R2(3): TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, KOCHI CORPORATION IB 7.7.2009. EXT.R2(4): TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(5): TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT DT.25.9.2009 TO THE SECRETARY, KOCHI CORPORATION. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................... W.P.(C)s.7052 & 8521/2010 ....................... Dated this the 16th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Parties in these writ petitions are common and the issue is also connected. Therefore, these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. In W.P.(C).7052/2010, the prayer sought is to stop functioning of the cattle shed managed by one P.F. Jacob who is arrayed as 2nd respondent in W.P.(C).7052/2010 and 3rd respondent in W.P.(C).8521/2010. 3. When W.P.(C).7052/2010 came up for hearing, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that his appeal against the decision of the Secretary was allowed by Ext.P3 order produced therein and therefore the prayer sought in that writ petition cannot be granted. It was in view of that submission, petitioner has filed W.P.(C).8521/2010 impugning the appellate order referred to above which is produced as Ext.P2 in W.P.(C). 8521/2010. W.P.(C).7052 & 8521/10 2 4. Although several contentions are raised in the pleadings, the only contention that is urged before this Court is that Ext.P2, the appellate order passed by the Municipal Council, disposing of the appeal filed by P.F.Jacob referred to above, was rendered without hearing the petitioner. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation concedes that as per the records of the Corporation also, notice was not given to the petitioner. It is not a matter of dispute that the appeal was filed against an order passed by the Secretary at the instance of the petitioner. If that be so, the appeal should not have been disposed of without hearing the petitioner. Therefore, the appellate order passed is in violation of the principles of natural justice. In view of this, W.P.(C).7052/2010 is closed and W.P.(C).8521/2010 is disposed of directing the Municipal Council to reconsider the appeal filed by Sri.P.J.Jacob. This shall be done with notice to the petitioner and P.J.Jacob, as expeditiously as possible at any rate, within six W.P.(C).7052 & 8521/10 3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile, status quo as on date will be maintained. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs