IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 W.A.No. 1770 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.30861/2008 Dated 31/07/2009 APPELLANTS: RESPONDENTS 1-3 IN IA/PETITIONERS 1. M.VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. LATE NARAYANAN NAIR, SRILEKAM, DOOR NO. 33/2474 A, ANUGRAHA LANE, LABOUR COLONY ROAD, THAMMANAM, COCHIN-32. 2. N.M.SANTHOSH, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. LATE N.A.MADHAVAN, NANDANATHU THUNDIYIL, DOOR NO.33/2474, ANUGRAHA LANE, LABOUR COLONY ROAD, THAMMANAM, COCHIN-32. 3. N.M.UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/0 LATE N.A.MADHAVAN, NANDANATHU THUNDIYIL, DOOR NO.33/2474 B, ANUGRAHA LANE, LABOUR COLONY ROAD, THAMMANAM, COCHIN-32. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SENIOR) SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS 1-4 & RESPONDENTS 4-10 IN IA/RESPONDENTS 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, ERNAKULAM. 5. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, INDIA TOURISM, SOUTHERN REGION, 154, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI-600 002. 7. JACOB, PROPRIETOR, LOCARNO LODGE, LABOUR COLONY ROAD, THAMMANAM, P.O.COCHIN-32. 8. THE GENERAL MANAGER, COCHIN METRO HOTELS PVT. LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE, BUILDING NO.32/2474(G), LABOUR COLONY ROAD, N.H.BYE-PASS, COCHIN-682 032. 9. K.P.DAMODHARAN NAIR, SUBSCRIBER OF THE COCHIN METRO HOTEL PVT.LTD., REGD.OFFICE, BUILDING NO.32/2474(G), LABOUR COLONY ROAD, N.H.BYE-PASS, COCHIN-682 032, RESIDING /AT SABARI 35/1872, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-75. 10. MATHEWS KUNJUMON, DIRECTOR OF THE COCHIN METRO HOTEL PVT.LTD., REGD.OFFICE, BUILDING NO.32/2474(G), LABOUR COLONY ROAD, N.H.BYE-PASS, COCHIN-682 032, RESIDING AT 285, MALAMEL HOUSE, E.M.S. P.O., COCHIN-682 021. 11. SRI.K.K.JOSE, DIRECTOR, COCHIN METRO HOTEL, LABOUR COLONY ROAD, THAMMANAM P.O., COCHIN-32. 12. THE SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. 13. M.SIVASANKAR, I.A.S., DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, TRIVANDRUM, KERALA. BY SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS R1 TO R5 SRI.C.C THOMAS (SENIOR)-R8 TO R11. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN-R8 TO R11 SRI.N.RAGHURAJ-R7 SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 1770 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellants are the writ petitioners. They were respondents 1 to 3 in I.A. No. 7578 of 2009. The petitioners in that I.A. who were respondents 8 to 11 in the Writ Petition wanted to run a Bar on the strength of Ext.R8(o) proceedings. The appellants who are residing in the neighbourhood attacked the grant of licence and the running of the bar on various grounds. The learned Single Judge allowed the application, permitting the petitioners in the application to run the bar, after getting the licence on the strength of Ext.R8(o). The appellants attack the said order of the learned Single Judge. 2. We heard the learned senior counsel, Sri. N.N. Sugunapalan, for the appellants. Having regard to the balance of convenience, we feel that if the petitioners in the I.A. (respondents 8 to 11 in the Writ Petition) are W.A. NO. 1770/2009 2 not allowed to run the bar, irreparable injury will be caused to them. If ultimately, the Writ Petition is dismissed, the appellants will not compensate them for the loss suffered. The learned senior counsel pointed out the merits of the case. We feel that while considering a Writ Appeal filed against an interim order, it is not proper to refer to the merits of the case. It has to be urged before the learned Single Judge. The appellants may move for early hearing of the matter and in that event, the learned Judge will try to hear the Writ Petition without delay. It is made clear that the findings in the interim order will not bind the appellants at the time of final hearing of the Writ Petition. It is also clarified that the appellants, if so advised, can challenge Ext.R8(o) proceedings based on which FL3 licence is going to be granted. Subject to the above observation, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.A. NO. 1770/2009 3 K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.A. NO.1770/2009 JUDGMENT 10th August, 2009 W.A. NO. 1770/2009 4