IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25466 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. JOSE, AGED 65, S/O.C.M.ANTONY, CHITTILAPPILLY HOUSE, PRIYADARSINI NAGAR, PARAVATANI, EAST FORT, THRISSUR. 2. ANNIE, W/O JOSE, CHITTILAPPILLY HOUSE, PRIYADARSINI NAGAR, PARAVATANI, EAST FORT, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, M O ROAD, THRISSUR. 2. THE SECRETARY, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, MO ROAD, THRISSUR. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS, SC FOR THRISSUR CORPN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 25466 OF 2008 F ==================== Dated this the 25th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against the revision of licence effected by the Corporation as per Ext.P6 in so far as the first petitioner is concerned and Ext.P12 in so far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned. 2. On notice, the standing counsel for the 1st respondent has entered appearance and submits that representations against the revision have been received from similarly situated people and that the Corporation is considering the matter in its endeavour to arrive at a solution acceptable to all. 3. Now that the Corporation is seized of the matter and is considering the issue in general, I think this writ petition is premature. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioners to agitate the matter in case the final decision of the Corporation is unsatisfactory to them, I close this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp