IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 10429 of 2011(C) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. JOSE KURIAN,S/O.KURIAN,PROPRIETOR SONY HOTEL,KOKKALE-21,THRISSUR,RESIDING AT KATTUTHARA HOUSE,C.M.C-5,CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): --------- --------------- 1. THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY,THRISSUR MINICIPAL CORPORATION,MUNICIPAL OFFICE,THRISSUR - 680001. 3. THE HEALTH OFFICER,THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,MUNICIPAL OFFICE,THRISSUR - 680001. 4. PAUL,S/O.LONAPPAN,EDATHALA PARAMBIL, KOORKANCHERRY.P.O,THRISSUR-680007. R1 &R2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN, SC. SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR R3 BY SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN R4 BY SRI. JIJO PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: STU WP(C).No. 10429 of 2011(C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : COPY OF THE LEASE DEED DTD 27/02/2008 EXECUTED BETWEEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2 : RECEIPT DTD 01/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT SHOWING PAYMENT OF PROFESSION TAX BY THE PETITIONER. P3 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD 03/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P4 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD 31/01/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD 31/01/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6 : COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD 31/01/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P7 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD 26/02/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P8 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD IN W.P.(C) NO.7249/2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R4(a) : COPY OF THE PLAINT DTD 01/12/2009 IN FILED O.S.NO.2712/2009 IN THE MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR. R4(b) : COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE DEFENDANT IN O.S.NO.2712/2009 IN THE MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR. R4(c) : COPY OF A REPLY DTD 27/07/2011 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER. R4(d) : COPY OF THE REPLY DTD 27/08/2011 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER. R4(e) : COPY OF THE FORM FOR LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD 13/08/2010. R4(f) : COPY OF AN APPLICATION DTD NIL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. R4(g) : COPY OF THE F.I.R DTD 11/12/2009 IN CRIME NO.966/2009 OF THE THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION. //TRUE COPY// STU P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10429 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November 2011. JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking a direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 not to take any coercive steps for closing down the hotel run by the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P1 lease deed and for a direction commanding the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 application. 2. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P4 application is pending consideration before the 3rd respondent and a direction may issued to the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 application within a time frame. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation submits that Ext.P7 order was passed after considering Ext.P4 application. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that as per Ext.P7 communication the Health Officer informed the petitioner that his application cannot be considered and, therefore, there is no consideration of the matter on merits and the learned W.P.(C) No.10429/2011 2 counsel for the petitioner requests this Court that a direction may be issued to reconsider and pass appropriate orders on merits after hearing the affected parities. 4. Ext.P7 communication would show that the application was not considered on merits for the reasons stated therein. 5. In the above said facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 application afresh on merits, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and 4th respondent. Status quo as on today shall be maintained by the parties till the disposal of Ext.P4 application. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE al