IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2009 / 25TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 33053 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- TRICHUR DISTRICT TRANSPORT- OPERATIONS ASSOCIATION CHALAKUDY-680307 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SHRI P.J.JOSHY, S/O.JACOB PAZHAYI HOUSE, KORATTY. BY ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL CHALAKUDY MUNICIPALITY CHALAKUDY, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ASST. ENGINEER KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHALAKUDY. ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR FOR R1 ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC. 33053/2008. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.7.1993 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT. P2 : COPY OF LICENSE DEED DATED 26.7.1997 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT. P3 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 7.1.1999 IN O.P. NO.9358/1995. EXT. P4 : COPY OF ORDER OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN O.P. NO.19634/2000. EXT. P5 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 4.12.2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT. P6 : COPY OF W.P.(C) NO.36063/2004 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT. P7 : COPY OF PRESENTATION DATED 10.3.2008 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT. P8 : COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 15.3.2008 SIGNED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT. P9 : COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 1.9.2008 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT. K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 33053 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an association. According to it, it is in occupation of Room No.2 of the Chalakudy Bus Stand Complex as a licensee of the first respondent. There is reference to various litigations apparently on the basis that the association had acquired the wrath of Clauses 12 and 13 of Ext.P2 licence deed. The last judgment is Ext.P6. Earlier this court had pronounced Ext.P4 judgment. Apparently Ext.P5, though passed, was found to be not in conformity with Ext.P4 judgment. Accordingly by Ext.P6 judgment Ext.P5 was quashed and the Municipality was directed to take a fresh decision in the matter. It was also directed that a notice of hearing should be issued to Sri.P.J.Joshy, who represents the association in the present writ petition, claiming to be the President. In the course of the proceedings electric connection came to be disconnected. According to the petitioner, they are in occupation and no action pursuant to Ext.P6 has been taken. Petitioner association has filed a representation as Ext.P7 and thereafter seek reconnection. 2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent and learned Standing Counsel for the Board also. First respondent has filed a WPC.33053/2008. 2 counter affidavit. 3. There is no dispute that no action pursuant to Ext.P6 judgment has been taken though judgment is in the year 2007. Learned Standing Counsel would submit that petitioner is in occupation of the room. In such circumstances, I feel that Ext.P9, which is an application seeking connection can be ordered to be considered in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and take a decision on Ext.P9 in accordance with law with notice to the petitioner and Municipality. It is for the second respondent to consider whether the petitioner satisfies all the requirements, and it is also for the petitioner to comply with the requirements under Regulation 14. A decision in accordance with law will be taken within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb