IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 9108 of 2008(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. K.M.MANOHARAN, ADVOCATE, S/O.MAHADEVA SWAMI, AGED 67 YEARS, ROOM NO.16, BUS STAND SHOPPING COMPLEX, NORTH PARAVUR. 2. GRACY GEORGE, PROPRIETOR, NEEMA GARMENTS ROOM NO.26, BUS STAND SHOPPING COMPLEX, NORTH PARAVUR. 3. DEEPA RAJAN, PROPRIETOR, SOUDARYA BEAUTY PARLOUR, ROOM NO.19, BUS STAND SHOPPING COMPLEX, NORTH PARAVUR. 4. K.A.SHAMSUDHIN, SECRETARY, PRIVATE BUS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION, ROOM NO.21, BUS STAND SHOPPING COMPLEX, NORTH PARAVUR. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, PARAVUR MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, NORTH PARAVUR. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI FOR R2 GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 9108 of 2008 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March , 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners, who are tenants of the second respondent Municipality, are occupying various shop rooms in the Municipal Bus stand shopping complex. According to them, they are paying rent without fail to the Municipality and there has been no dereliction on their part in discharging their duties. Their grievance is that there is no bathroom/toilet facility in the shopping complex. It is stated that previously there was the facility, but the bathrooms/toilets were closed down for the purpose of reconstruction. Though it was assured at that time that reconstruction will be completed at the earliest and bath rooms will be opened, till this date the Municipality has not kept its words. Ext.P3 representation has been submitted by the petitioners on 13.3.2008. According to the petitioners, Ext.P3 was submitted as reminder to Ext.P2, which was submitted earlier. Whatever that be, since Exts.P2 and P3 are apparently pending before the Municipality, it is only appropriate that the WPC No.9108/2008 2 Municipality takes an early decision on Exts.P2 and P3. I, therefore, dispose of this writ petition issuing the following directions; The second respondent will take up Exts.P2 and P3 immediately, consider the request therein in the light of the various grounds raised in the writ petition and take a correct decision at the earliest and at any rate within one month of receiving a copy of this judgment. If the petitioners are desirous of hearing opportunity from the second respondent, it is open to them to make a request in that regard along with a copy of this judgment. If the request is made, the same will be granted. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. dpk