IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10974 of 2010(V) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- MOHAMMED IRSHAD, PROPRIETOR, K.C.TRAVELS AND TOURS, BEKAL FORT BEACH, PALLIKARE, KASARAGOD. BY ADVS.MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR MR.K.JOHN MATHAI MR.P.BENNY THOMAS MR.P.GOPINATH MR.V.J.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TOURISM DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BEKAL RESORTS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., 2ND FLOOR, KVS HYPER MARKET BUILDING, PALAKKUNNU, BEKAL P.O., KASARAGOD - 671 318. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.NARAYANAN R2 BY ADVS. MR.K.JAJU BABU, MR.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.10974/2010-V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is the proprietor of M/s.K.C Tours and Travels. The second respondent, a Government of Kerala undertaking, invited tenders for provision of tented accommodation at Bekal Fort Beach at Bekal in Kasaragod District primarily for the use of foreign tourists who visit the area in large numbers. Originally, the petitioner was granted licence for three years with effect from 31/12/2005. Though the petitioner sought for extension upto 10 years, it was extended upto December, 2009 considering it as a special case. Thereafter, it was extended by three months i.e. upto 31/03/2010. Even though the petitioner was requesting for extension for a minimum period of ten years no action was taken in the matter and, accordingly, he has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider Ext.P12 and pass appropriate orders and allow the petitioner to continue with the operation till orders are passed. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. It is submitted that a similar representation like that of Ext.P12 was considered by the Board, i.e. letter dated 10/03/2010 of the petitioner, and that was W.P.(C). No.10974/2010 -:2:- rejected as per communication issued to him dated 27/03/2010. A copy of the said communication was placed for perusal before me. It is clear from the said communication that the Government has directed the second respondent to handover the area to the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation for setting up a Premium Resort on “Beach Camping Theme”. Therefore, in the light of the above, the second respondent could not accept the suggestion made by the petitioner for extension of the licence for another period. 3. Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that Ext.P12 may be directed to be considered by the Government, as the Government has already taken a view in the matter as above, no purpose will be served by issuing any such direction. In that view of the matter, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms