IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 29TH MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 278 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA. 12572/2009 IN WPC.8303/2008 APPELLANTS: PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 7,9 TO 12,14,19 TO 31,34 & 35( ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MOHAMMED.A.K.S, S/O. MOOSA, AGED 72 YEARS, BUSINESS, KANNUR CENTRA; MARKET, KANNUR MUNICIPALITY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. C.HASSAN KUNHI, S/O.PALLIKUTTY, \ AGED 70 YEARS, DO. DO. 3. B.K.ASHRAF, S/O.AMU, AGED 48 YEARS, DO. DO. 4. V.K.ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.HYDROS, AGEDE 72 YEARS, DO. DO. 5. T.HASSANKUNHI, S/O.MOHAMMED, AGED 74 YEARS, DO. DO. 6. C.P.SA;A,, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 43 YEARS, DO. DO. 7. K.T.MUHAMMED ALI, S/O.HASSAN KUTTI, AGED 64 YEARS, DO. DO. 8. T.K.GANGADHARAN, S/O.ACHUTHAN, AGED 67 YEARS, DO. DO. 9. O.C.SHAKUNTHALA, D/O.KUNHIKANNAN, AGED 67 YEARS, DO. DO. 10. P.M.AMINA, D/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 70 YEARS, DO. DO. 11. K.ABDUL SATHAR, S/O.ABDULLA,DO. DO. WA 278/2010 2 12. P.GANGADHARAN, S/O.AMBUKUTTY VAIDYAR, DO. DO. 13. V.K.HAMEED, S/O. AHAMMAD, AAGED 60 YEARS, DO. DO. 14. A.ANOOP, S/O.FALGUNAN, AGED 26 YEARS, DO. DO. 15. M.K.ABDUL RAHIMAN, S/O.HASSAINAR, AGED 67 YEARS, DO. DO. 16. THAIKANDY MUSTAFA, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, AGED 75 YEARS, DO. DO. 17. ABDUL JABBAR.K.P, S/O.HAMEED, AGED 32 YEARS, DO. DO. 18. M.T.SALEEM, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNHI, AGED 47 YEARS, DO. DO. 19. M.T.ABDUL MAHJEED, S/O.MOIDU, AGED 62 YEARS, DO. DO. 20. M.T.ABDUL RAFEEQUE, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNHI, AGED 40 YEARS, DO. DO. 21. S.ABDUL LATHEEF,, S/O.ABDULRAHUMAN, AGED 76 YEARS, DO. DO. 22. P.N.SUNITH, S/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 43 YEARS, DO. DO. 23. P.M.MUSTAFA, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 47 YEARS, DO. DO. 24. PALLIVALAPPIL NIZAR.P.V, S/O.ABDULRAHIMAN KUTTY,AGED 49 YEARS, DO. DO. 25. A.P.EBRAHIM KUTTY, S/O.ERMULAN, AGED 60 YEARS, DO. DO. 26. RAKIB, S/O. K.KHATHIM, AGED 55 YEARS, DO. DO. WA 278/2010 3 27. C.VINOD, BUSINESS, KANNUR CENTRAL MARKET, KANNUR MUNICIPALITY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, KANNUR MINICIPALITY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. SRI. K.K. CHANDRAN PILLAI, S.C. FOR MUNICIPALITY THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN Ag. CJ & C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. NO. 278 OF 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010. J U D G M E N T Raman, Ag. CJ. This appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A. 12572/2009 in W.P.(C) 8303/2008, dated 30.1.2010. The writ petition was filed by the occupants of the Central Market in Kannur Municipality. They pleaded that they are in possession of the respective shop rooms/ bunks since more than fifty years and they are depending on the income derived from the business carried on in the said premises. The Municipality wanted to re- construct the structure and for that purpose they sought eviction of the writ petitioners. The writ petitioners wanted rehabilitation. Municipality was prepared to provide rooms in the new building as may be allotted to them on such rent/fee normally fixed and also in accordance with law. Taking into consideration of larger public interest to generate funds for an LSGI and in the interest of the individual to carry on commercial activities, learned Single Judge WA 278/2010 2 ordered the Municipality to prepare a list of eligible occupants entitled for rehabilitation in accordance with the scheme, provided, petitioners surrender their possession as and when sought for by the Municipality. Petitioners specifically sought for some alternate arrangements to be made during the construction period, which was declined by the learned Single Judge. The judgment become final. This I.A. was filed by the writ petitioners seeking time to vacate the premises or at least till the tenders are invited and accepted for the reconstruction of the Central Market and to rehabilitate them and to fix a time limit for reconstruction. Such an application, normally, could not have been moved after the disposal of the writ petition, since it is seeking a modification of the judgment. So however, learned Single Judge thought that three weeks time could be granted for surrendering vacant possession of the premises, that too, the order was passed only on 30.1.2010 where as the I.A. was filed as early as in October, 2009. Thus, petitioners virtually got another three months time from the date of petition and further three weeks time from the date of the order. 2. We do not find any good ground to entertain this appeal against such an order. However, considering the fact that the writ WA 278/2010 3 appeal is filed, we direct that the three weeks time granted by the learned Single Judge will commence from today. Subject to the above, the writ appeal is dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, (Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE) C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE).