IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 WA.No. 2212 of 2008 ------- --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.26234/2008 Dated 01/09/2008 .................... APPELLANT/REVIEW PETITIONR/2ND RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RIJU MUKUNDAN, S/O. MUKUNDAN, THEVARATHOPPU VEEDU, TB JUNCTION ATTINGAL. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR SRI.P.BANI RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. P.T. RAMER, S/O. THIRUKODI, NADAR, SELVI VESSELS, PARVATHIPURAM GRAMOM, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 2. ATTINGAL MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ATINGAL. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.G.P.SMT. K. MEERA SRI.S.D. ASOKAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No.2212 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the entire materials available on record, we do not propose to issue notice to the party respondent, especially in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant at the bar. He submits that the appellant would be satisfied, if opportunity is reserved in his favour to urge all his contentions before the appropriate authority while impugning the order of renewal of licence in favour of respondent No.1, the tenant of the building belonging to the appellant. (2) In our view, the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant is only just and reasonable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. (3) Therefore, the writ appeal is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the appellant to raise all his contentions while questioning the validity and legality of the order passed by the municipality to renew the licence to respondent No.1. The 2 W.A.No.2212/08 competent authority shall consider the appeal, if any, that may be preferred by the appellant, uninfluenced or untrammelled by any of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the order passed in the writ petition or the review petition. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE cl