IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3798 of 2009(Y) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------- PUTHENVEETTIL VINODHAN,S/O.LATE BHASKARAN, 46 YEARS, BUSINESS RESIDING AT PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, PANOOR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. PANOOR, THALASSERY, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HAREENDRAN SMT.MIJI JOHN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. SECRETARY, PANOOR, GRAMA PANCHAYATH PANOOR, P.O.PANOOR, KANNUR DIST. 2. KUNTHAPILAKKOOL SUBHASH, S/O. DAMODARAN 43 YEARS, BUSINESS, KUNTHAPILAKKOL HOUSE, PANOOR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. PANOOR, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. KUNTHAPILAKKOOL SUNIL KUMAR, S/O. DAMODARAN, 40 YEARS, BUSINESS, KUNTHAPILAKKOOL HOUSE, PANOOR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. PANOOR, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 3798 OF 2009 (B) ==================== Dated this the 5th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P19, an order passed by the 1st respondent directing that in the event the petitioner does not obtain licence within 7 days, he will be evicted from the premises, if necessary, by utilising police force. 2. In my view, if the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P19, he has a statutory remedy of appeal and therefore the petitioner has to necessarily pursue that remedy. 3. However, having regard to the threat of forcible eviction as reflected in Ext.P19, in order to enable the petitioner to seek appropriate interlocutory orders safeguarding his interest from the appellate authority, it is directed that the implementation of Ext.P19 shall be deferred for a period of two weeks from today. 4. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent on 9/2/2009. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp