IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2008 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 9121 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ANWAR HUSSAIN, S/O.AHAMMED HUSSAIN,KAITHA VARAM BUNGLOW, KANKKATHU MUKKU,KOLLAM -12 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- KOLLAM CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHANDAS, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No. 9121 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT Sri.M.K.Chandramohan Das takes notice on behalf of the Kollam Corporation and I have heard the submissions of Sri.K.V. Gopinathan Nair, counsel for the petitioner and Sri.C.S.Manilal, representing Sri.M.K.Chandramohan Das. Under challenge in this writ petition is Ext.P10 order of the Corporation issued under Section 406(2) of the Municipalities Act. Sri.K.V.Gopinathan Nair submits that Ext.P10 order has been issued in violation of the Corporation's own order- Ext.P4 which was issued pursuant to Ext.P7 interim order in an earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner. On the terms of Ext.P4, the Corporation has extended the licence in respect of the building in question till such time as the Government withdraws the order of stay issued by the Government vide order No.46850/B 1/ 2002. According to the petitioner, the stay order issued by the Government and referred to in Ext.P4 is even now in currency and the Corporation is not at all WPC.No.9121/08 2 justified in ignoring that stay order and issuing Ext.P10. Sri.C.S.Manilal submits that Ext.P10 is only a provisional order in terms of Section 406(2) to which the petitioner has submitted Ext.P11 explanation. The corporation will be considering Ext.P11 and taking a decision. It is open to the petitioner to point out during the hearing pursuant to Ext.P10 and P11 about the currency of the Government order referred to in Ext.P4. Having considered the rival submissions, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of issuing the following directions since Ext.P10 is only a provisional order to which the petitioner has submitted Ext.P11. The respondent will hear the petitioner on the issue covered by Ext.P10 in the light of Ext.P11 reply submitted by the petitioner and pass orders as to whether Ext.P10 order should be confirmed. It is open to the petitioner to bring to the Corporation's notice the currency of the Government order referred to in Ext.P4 and the circumstance that the Corporation has collected licence fee from the petitioner even for the period upto 2008 vide Ext.P8. The hearing as directed above shall WPC.No.9121/08 3 be conducted by the Corporation and orders will be passed at the earliest and at any rate within one month of receiving a copy of this judgment. Till such time as orders are passed by the Corporation pursuant to this judgment, the Corporation will not enforce Ext.P10. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.9121/08 4