IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2011 / 3RD SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 15376 of 2011(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- Y.MOHAMMED NAHAS, PROPRIETOR PRIME CASHEW INDUSTRIES, PUTHOOR, RESIDING AT NIYAS MANZIL, KANNIMELCHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.DILEEP P.PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. INSPECTOR, FACTORIES AND BOILERS, KUNDARA, KOLLAM. 2. SENIOR JOINT DIRECTOR, FACTORIES AND BOILERS, KOLLAM. ADDL.R3. SRI.JOBRAN G.VARGHESE, VAROOR HOUSE, WARD NO.8, KULAKKADA, PUTHOOR, KOLLAM. (ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN IA NO.10951/2011 DATED 25/7/11) GOVT.PLEADER SMT.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.15376/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTIONORDER DT 4.4.2011 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11.4.2011. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.4.2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 15376 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 25th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the registered owner of a cashew factory numbered as CHW/KUR/11/77/88. The factory was let out to one Mr.Jobran G.Varghese, the additional 3rd respondent in this writ petition. According to the petitioner, the rental arrangement expired on 31/12/2010 and has not been renewed. It is stated that, while so, the lessee applied for renewal of his licence and that his application is pending before the 1st respondent. Coming to know of the same, petitioner submitted Exts.P2 and P3 representations objecting to the renewal. Orders have not been passed and therefore the writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondents to consider and take necessary action on Exts.P2 and P3 at the earliest. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents to take all the necessary steps to stop functioning of the factory numbered as CHW/KUR/11/77/88”. 2. By order dated 12/7/2011, this Court required the petitioner to show whether there is any statutory prescription that WPC No. 15376/11 :2 : there should be a current lease for getting the licence renewed. Counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that there is no such prescription. 3. In that view of the matter, I am not persuaded to direct consideration of the representations. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp