IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2009 / 9TH ASWINA 1931 OP.No. 21536 of 2000(L) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.P. CHANDRAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. VINAYAKA AGENCY, 11/A, VIKAS BUILDINGS, RAILWAY STATION LINK ROAD, CALICUT – 673 002. BY MR.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CALICUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CALICUT. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOZHIKODE. R1 BY MR.M.K.ABOOBACKER, S.C, MR.V.M.KURIAN,S.C. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 21536/2000-L: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE LICENCE IN FORM NO.24, WHICH IS VALID UPTO 31/03/2001, ISSUED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE FIRE POLICY WHICH IS VALID UPTO 21/03/2001. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION UNDER THE CENTRAL SALES TAX (REGISTRATION AND TURNOVER) RULE 1957. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION UNDER THE KERALA GENERAL SALES TAX RULES 1963. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 25/03/99 IN C.M.P. 12026/99 IN O.P. 7126/99-W OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE R.1. HELD ON 16/06/2000. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 02/04/1998 OF THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FIRE STATION, KOZHIKODE TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE CHALAN DTD. 05/04/2000 ISSUED BY THE R.1. ACCEPTING A SUM OF RS.500/- TOWARDS FEE FOR TEMPORARY SHED. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE LICENCE DEED DTD. 30/04/97 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 21536 of 2000 ================== Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 1st respondent in informing the 2nd respondent, who is the authority under the Explosives Act, not to renew the explosives licence of the petitioner issued for the purpose of conducting the business of selling fire crackers in the shop room bearing No.A/11 owned by the 1st respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that the 1st respondent had been trying to evict the petitioner from that shop room, against which, the petitioner had filed O.P.No.7126/1999 and obtained an interim stay. According to the petitioner, the decision taken by the 1st respondent not to give permission to the petitioner to conduct business of sale of fire crackers in the shop room in question was taken by the 1st respondent without notice to the petitioner. 2. The contention of the 1st respondent in the counter affidavit filed is that as per the licence agreement between the petitioner and the 1st respondent, the petitioner is not permitted to conduct any business other than lottery and video games in the shop room in question except with previous permission of the 1st respondent. According to them, although for some time permission to conduct the business of sale of fire crackers was granted, in view of the complaints O.P.21536/00 2 received by them from the nearby shop owners, it has been decided not to extend the permission. It is under the above circumstances, the 1st respondent has informed the 2nd respondent that the petitioner's licence under the Explosives Act may not be renewed. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. I am of opinion that it is not necessary to consider the contentions of the parties on merits in so far as the period of licence involved in the original petition, is long over. Therefore, leaving the parties to take up all their contentions before the appropriate authorities as and when the petitioner applies for renewal of explosives licence again, this original petition is closed. In this respect, I also note the submission made by the counsel for the 1st respondent that the 1st respondent is no more in existence and the successor-in-interest of the 1st respondent is Calicut Corporation. If that be so, it is for the successor-in-interest to take up the matter in accordance with law. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge O.P.21536/00 3 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No. 21536 of 2000-L ================== J U D G M E N T 1st October, 2009