IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2009 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6700 of 2009(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.P. SAMEER, S/O. K.P. ABDU, KASTTIL PEEDIYEKKAL HOUSE, POST MENADTHOOR, THANLUR VIA, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TANUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, POST TANUR, MALAPPURAM DIST, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, TANUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, POST TANUR, MALAPPURAM DIST. ADV.HARISH R.MENON, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.6700 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is engaged in the business of selling chicken in a building of his own for which the petitioner had a licence. The petitioner filed an application on 19.8.2008 for renewal of the licence. The same has been rejected by the Panchayat. Alleging that the same is beyond the period prescribed under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and therefore, the petitioner has already obtained a deemed licence, the petitioner approached the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. By Ext.P2 order, the Tribunal allowed that appeal ex parte. Subsequently, the Panchayat filed a writ petition, in which, by Ext.P6 judgment, this Court set aside the ex parte order and directed reconsideration of the appeal after affording an opportunity to the Panchayat to produce documents and contest the matter. The petitioner now submits that although Ext.P2 order has been set aside, the appeal having been restored to the file of the Tribunal, the interim order earlier granted by the Tribunal also revives and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to conduct the business pending disposal of the appeal. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Panchayat opposes the same. According to him, since the Panchayat has rejected 2 the application within the time prescribed in the Panchayat Raj Act, there is no question of any deemed licence. I am of opinion that these are all matters which the petitioner has to take up with the Tribunal. If the petitioner wants an interim order, the petitioner can approach the Tribunal for the same also. The learned Standing Counsel for the Panchayat points out that the matter stands posted before the Tribunal today. 3. In that view, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the Tribunal appropriately. If the petitioner moves the Tribunal for interim orders, orders on the same shall be passed expeditiously. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge