IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2010 / 13TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 17887 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- DR.BABY MATHEW, S/O.N.J.MATHEW, AGED 50, RESIDING AT H.NO.10/96, VIKAS NAGAR, PATTATHANAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION OF KOLLAM, KOLLAM. 2. THE HEALTH OFFICER, CORPORATION OF KOLLAM, KOLLAM. BY STANDING COUNSEL SHRI C.UNNIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No. 17887/10 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT DATED 14.8.03 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT DATED 5.3.04 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 18.3.06 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 12.6.08 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPYH OF THE LICENCE DATED 17.8.09 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 2.5.09 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 17.5.10 SUBMITTED TO THE RESPONDENTS. TRUE COPY T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.17887 of 2010 --------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner and his wife are having two residential buildings within the Kollam Corporation. They are conducting a Clinic under the name and style Modern Urology Centre. The Writ Petition is filed seeking for a direction to the Corporation to consider Exhibit P7 application for renewal of licence and pass appropriate orders. 2. It is mentioned in the Writ Petition that the application was not being considered by the authorities of the Corporation presumably because of a dispute regarding the allegation of an unauthorised construction. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation. 4. There will be a direction to the respondents to accept the application of the petitioner , a copy of which is produced as Exhibit P7. The learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitted that some particulars have been omitted in the application and the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted W.P.(C)No. 17887/10 -2- that when the original is submitted the same will be rectified also. If the petitioner presents the original of Exhibit P7, the same will be accepted by the respondents and appropriate decision will be taken after considering the same in accordance with the rules and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a period of two months. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) dsn True copy P.A.to judge