IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2011 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 8917 of 2011(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DEVASSY, AGED 75 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, KALLINGAL VEEDU, MUNCIPAL QUARTERS ROAD, CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. CHALAKUDY MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.PIN- 680 307 2. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, CHALAKUDY MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON.PIN- 680 307 3. DAVID ANTO, PALLIPPATTU HOUSE, M.G.ROAD, CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.PIN- 680 001 R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.M.P. ASHOK KUMAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.8917 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 29th March, 2011 JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed on being aggrieved by the delay in the matter of disposal of Ext.P1 appeal preferred by the petitioner before the first respondent. Ext.P1 is an appeal preferred under section 509(1) of the Kerala Municipality Act. It is now pending before the second respondent. In terms of the provisions under section 509 of the Kerala Municipality Act the second respondent is competent to consider and pass order on Ext.P1 appeal. In fact, the grievance of the petitioner highlighted in the said appeal is with respect to the action on the part of respondents 1 and 2 in grating licence to the third respondent for conducting Wooden Furniture Manufacturing Unit. It is for its redressal that he had preferred Ext.P1 appeal. In view of the order I propose to pass in this writ petition, I do not think it necessary to issue notice to the third respondent. Considering the fact that Ext.P1 appeal is pending before the second respondent, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised in this writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 appeal in accordance with law, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of WP(C).No.8917/2011 2 receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that before passing orders thereon the petitioner and also the third respondent shall be put on notice. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // true copy // P.S. to Judge