IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2008 / 14TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23229 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: PETITIONER ---------------------- SHINE K.B. KURUMULIANIYIL, KIZHAKKUMPADAM, UDUMPANNOOR, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. UDUMPANNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, UDUMPANNOOR P.O., IDUKKI. 2. UDUMPANNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,UDUMPANNOOR P.O.,IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN,SC,UDUMBANNOOR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 23229 OF 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 5th August, 2008. JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3. Ext.P3 is an auction notice published by the first respondent-Panchayat for auctioning the stock in the poultry farm and other movable items belonging to the petitioner in the said notice. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that against the appellate order passed by the Panchayat refusing to grant him licence to run the poultry farm, he has already filed a revision before the Tribunal and that the matter is scheduled to be considered by the Tribunal on 21st of this month. It is also stated that in three weeks time he will liquidate the entire stock now available. It is submitted that, in the meanwhile, if the auction now scheduled as per Ext.P3 is permitted to go ahead grave prejudice will be caused. Therefore, he prays that the Panchayat may be restrained from conducting the auction as per Ext.P3. 3. I have heard counsel for the Panchayat who entered appearance. It is submitted by the standing counsel that the petitioner has already approached the Panchayat and has WPC 23229/08 2 undertaken not to increase the stock in any manner. Since the only endeavour of the petitioner is to liquidate the existing stock, I feel three weeks time sought for by him is only reasonable. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates his undertaking before this Court also that no fresh stock will be inducted in the poultry farm and that the entire stock will be liquidated in three weeks from today and this undertaking is recorded. 5. Now that counsel for the petitioner has given an undertaking as above, I do not think that any prejudice will be caused to the Panchayat if the auction as scheduled in Ext.P3 is adjourned till 25.8.2008. 6. Since the revision petition is coming up before the Tribunal for orders on 21.8.2008 and subject to the undertaking as above, it is directed that further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 notice will be deferred till 25.8.2008. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE jj