IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2010 / 14TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23949 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- A.K.SUGUNAN, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 60, RESIDING AT RAINBOW HOUSE, S.H.LANE, VYTTILA, KOCHI-19. BY ADV. MR. S.SREEKUMAR MR. P.MARTIN JOSE MR. P.PRIJITH MR. S.VAIDYANATHAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-11. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, COCHIN-11. 3. THE REVENUE OFFICER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, COCHIN-11. 4. THE THAHASILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM- 682011. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 23949 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 5th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner had taken three shop rooms in the shopping complex belonging to the respondents at Vyttila in the year, 1995 effecting payment of the security deposit and also the advance licence fee as prescribed. It is stated that, the monthly licence fee was remitted till the month of August, 1999. Subsequently, due to some financial constraints, the licence of the petitioner was cancelled, as borne by Ext. P5, followed by several notices issued by the first respondent Corporation, required to satisfy the arrears, which issue was challenged by filing W.P.(C) 21560 of 2004, wherein Ext. P10 judgment was passed directing the concerned respondents to consider and dispose of Exts. P6 and P7 after giving notice to the petitioner. 2. Pursuant to the above direction, the concerned respondent passed Ext. P11 order, rejecting the application preferred by the petitioner. This is stated as not in compliance with Ext. P10 judgment, which in turn was subjected to challenge by filing W.P. (C) 10726 of 2010 leading to Ext. P12 judgment, whereby the petitioner was relegated to avail the statutory remedy by way of appeal. W.P. (C) No. 23949 of 2010 : 2 : 3. The case of the petitioner is that, pursuant to Ext. P12 judgment the petitioner has preferred Ext.P13 appeal, which is stated as pending consideration before the first respondent. Without any regard to the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner is confronted with Exts. P21 and P22 demand notices issued by the 4th respondent under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, which hence are subjected to challenge. 4. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the other respondents. 5. In the above facts and circumstances, the appellate authority, before whom Ext. P13 appeal is stated as pending, is hereby directed to consider and pass final orders in the said appeal in accordance with law, after hearing, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, till such final orders are passed on Ext. P13, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts. P21 and 22 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd