IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH APRIL 2009 / 4TH VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 12701 of 2009(G) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER : ----------------------- O.G.SASIDHARAN,AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.LATE O.K.GANGADHARAN,KANNAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, POOTHOTTA P.O. MANAKUNNAM VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.B.RAJIV KOYIKKAL RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE GOVT.SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION,GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN,ERNAKULAM. 3. T.K.ARAVINDAKSHAN,AGED 68 YEARS, UNNIYANTHARATHUNDIYIL HOUSE,POONITHURA VILLAGE, PONNURUNNI P.O., KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. T.K.BHAMINI, AGED 62 YEARS, UNNIYANTHARATHUNDIYIL HOUSE,POONITHURA VILLAGE, PONNURUNNI P.O. KANAYANNUR TALUK,ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI. T.K. VIPIN DAS, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. REMESH BABU, SC, COCHIN CORP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.12701 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of the shop in the name and style 'Santhivision Optics' in the building No.C.C.XXX/1010 (Old No.XXX/227 2-A). According to the petitioner, for starting a cycle shop in the said premises, he had applied for licence from the Corporation for which he had remitted licence fee and the professional tax as evidenced by Ext.P1. The grievance of the petitioner is that thereafter, no licence has issued by the Corporation. Therefore, he approached this court with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Corporation to issue licence as prayed for. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Corporation. 3. As the request for licence is pending before the second respondent, who is the authority to consider the request on merit and to grant the same if the petitioner is otherwise entitled, I am not proposed to enter into the finding W.P.(C) No.12701 of 2009 2 on merit. On the other hand, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the second respondent to dispose of Ext.P6. 4. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to take up Ext.P6 representation after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the respondents 3 and 4. The second respondent is further directed to dispose of the same within one month from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN JUDGE pac