IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 7986 of 2008(A) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. C.K. ABDUL RAHMAN, S/O.KOMU, AGED 80 CHIRAMURIYIL, KUNJUNNIKKARA, ULIYANNOOR P.O. KADUNGALLUR VILLAGE, PARUR TALUK. 2. SAFIYA, W/O.MOHAMED KUNHI, AGED 51 CHIRAMURIYIL, KUNJUNNIKKARA, ULIYANNOOR P.O. KADUNGALLUR VILLAGE, PARUR TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF SMT.MOLLY JACOB SMT.U.M.FOUSIA SMT.RABIA BEEGAM T.K. SRI.JOBI.A.THAMPI SMT.ASHIFA YOUSEFF SMT.T.V.SREEJA SMT.M.KABANI DINESH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ALUVA MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ALUVA P.O. -683101. 3. JOY, S/O.JOY, AGED 54, VALIYAPADATH ALUVA WEST, ALUVA. 4. ANIL, S/O.JOY, VALIYAPADATH, ALUVA WEST ALUVA. 5. ASHWATHY, D/O.JOY, VALIYAPADATH ALUVA WEST, ALUVA. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR R2 BY ADV.MR.V.M.KURIAN, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.7986 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 10th March, 2008 JUDGMENT This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners impugning Ext.P10 interim order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions and seeking directions to the Municipality for immediate stoppage of business by respondents 3 to 5 in the building which is subject matter of the appeal before the Tribunal. There is a further prayer for a direction to the Municipality not to issue any licence to respondents 3 to 5 for conduct of any business in the building. When this Writ Petition came up for admission, the Government Pleader took notice on behalf of the 1st respondent and Adv.Mr.V.M.Kurian, S.C. took notice on behalf of the 2nd respondent. In the nature of the orders which are being passed hereunder, I am not inclined to issue notice to respondents 3 to 5. 2. The grievance of the petitioners that they also should have been made parties to Appeal No.94/2008 filed by the third respondent has elements of genuineness. I am of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the 1st respondent-Tribunal to allow any application for impleadment submitted by the petitioners in Appeal No.94/2008 and to dispose of the appeal after hearing the petitioners also. As for the petitioners request that the Municipality W.P.C.No.7986/08 - 2 - should not issue licence to respondents 3 to 5 for conducting business, I am of the view that it will suffice if the Municipality is directed to hear the petitioners also before orders are passed on any application for licence submitted by respondents 3 to 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition will stand disposed of issuing the following directions: The petitioners are permitted to file applications seeking their impleadment in Appeal No.94/2008 within two weeks from today. If any such impleadment application is received by the Tribunal, the Tribunal will allow the application noticing that the petitioners are also at least proper parties, if not necessary parties to the appeal. Similarly, if any application submitted by respondents 3 to 5 for licence for conducting business in the building which is subject matter of Appeal No.94/2008 is pending with the Municipality, the Municipality will hear the petitioners also before orders are passed on the licence application. It is made clear that apart from what is stated above, this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the grounds raised in the appeal or in the Writ Petition. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE W.P.C.No.7986/08 - 3 -