IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2010 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10846 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BINU M.JOHNSON, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O. JOHNSON, MANNARETHU, ANAPARAMBAL NORTH.P.O., THALAVADY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. JOHNSON M. PAUL @ PRAKASH, AGED 39 YEARS S/O. PAULOSE, MANNARETHU ANAPARAMBAL NORTH.P.O., THALAVADY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI (VENNELA) SRI.ABHILASH AKBAR SRI.T.B.SIVAPRASAD SMT.SUMEY CHANDRAN SRI.V.S.PREJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TAXES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, SALES TAX CIRCLE OFFICE HARIPAD. 3. THE EDATHUVA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE, EDATHUVA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, EDATHUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ALAPPUZHA 5. THE SECRETARY, EDATHUVA GRAMA PANCHAYAT ALAPPUZHA. 6. M.M.PAULOSE, MANNARETHU(SOBHA NIVAS) ANAPARAMBAL NORTH.P.O., THALAVADY, ALAPPUZHA DIST. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).10846/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioners are proprietors of a shop called 'Prakash Vessel Palace'. In this writ petition their grievance is against Ext.P9 order of the 5th respondent cancelling the licence issued by the Panchayat. Ext.P9 is dated 17.7.2009 and aggrieved by the said order, petitioners have filed Ext.P11 appeal along with Ext.P12 stay petition. So far appeal and stay petition have not been heard. It is in these circumstances the writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P9. 2. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy of appeal by filing Ext.P11, I feel it is only appropriate that orders should be passed thereon as expeditiously as possible. 3. Taking into account the above facts, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- W.P.(C).10846/10 2 (i). Ext.P11 appeal shall be considered by the 4th respondent within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioners and other affected parties. (ii). Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even as on date, Ext.P9 has not been implemented. If it is so, it is directed that status quo as on date, insofar as Ext.P9 is concerned, shall be maintained till the appeal is disposed of. Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment along with the copy of the writ petition before the 4th respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs