IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2008 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34568 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PHILIP THANKACHAN, MYLANTHARA HOUSE, MALAKUNNAM.P.O, CHANGANASSERY TALUK, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOMY GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIKOM.P.O, KOTTAYAM. 2. SECRETARY, VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY, VAIKOM. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM. 4. GIREESH, MATTAYIL CHAYAPALLI, PANAMPUKADU, VAIKOM.P.O. 5. PREHALADAN(SANKARAN), PERAYIL HOUSE, POLASSERI, VAIKOM.P.O. 6. SAJI, KALATHIPARAMBU HOUSE, POLASSERI, VAIKOM.P.O. 7. SABU, KALLARAKKAL HOUSE, KOVILAKATHUMKADAVU, VAIKOM.P.O. ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM FOR R1-2 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 34568 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd December, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner entered into Ext. P1 agreement with the 1st respondent Municipality for production and sale of ice in the fish market at Vaikom on payment of Rs. 1,30,000/- per year as licence fee. As per the agreement, the petitioner has exclusive right to sell ice in the fish market. The Municipality also undertook in the agreement that they would ensure that nobody else sells ice in the fish market. Petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that contrary to the terms and conditions contained in Ext. P1, respondents 4 to 7 are selling ice in the market. In the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent filed Ext. P6 complaint before the 3rd respondent seeking police help to prevent respondents 4 to 7 from selling ice in the market. Since the 3rd respondent did not take any effective steps in the matter, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to ensure that no illegal sale of the ice is being conducted by respondents 4 to 7 or by any other person in the Kovilakathumkadavu fish market in contravention of Exhibit P1. b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to take immediate action on Exhibit P6 complaint filed by respondents 1 and 2 at the earliest.” 2. On 24-11-2009, I passed the following interim order: “Government Pleader shall get instructions from the 3rd respondent as to what action he has taken on Ext. P6 request from the Municipality for police assistance for preventing respondents 4 to 7 from selling ice within the fish market in respect of which the petitioner holds a licence.” 3. Today, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the complaint received by the 3rd respondent has been enquired into and it was found to be true. Accordingly, appropriate W.P.C. No. 34568/2008. -: 2 :- action has been taken to see that respondents 4 to 7 do not sell ice in the fish market. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is closed recording the above submission and with a direction to the 3rd respondent to see that respondents 4 to 7 or anybody else do not sell ice in the fish market contrary to Ext. P1 agreement. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/