IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 33439 of 2007(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- REGI JOSE, S/O. A.T.JOSE, AGED 36, RESIDING AT ALAPPATT KUNNEL HOUSE, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SRI.HARISH R. MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MUNICIPAL CHAIRPERSON, MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, PALA. 2. THE MUNICIPAL SECRETARY, PALA MUNICIPALITY, PALA. 3. TOMY EAPPEN, S/O. EAPEN, RESIDING AT ANCHERI HOUSE, KIZHATHADIYOOR KARA, MEENACHIL TALUK, PALA. ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN FOR R2 SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN FOR R2 SRI.K.T.THOMAS FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 33439/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE AGREEMENT. P2. COPY OF THE LICENCE DTD.15.2.07. P3. COPY OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION DTD.15.2.07. P4. COPY OF THE ORDER BY R2 DTD.20.2.07. P5. COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD.2.3.07. P6. COPY OF THE MINUTES BOOK OF R1. P7. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No. 15285/07. P8. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT C.C.C.NO.1438/07. P9. COPY OF THE ORDER BY R1 & R2 DTD.10.10.07. P10. COPY OF THE SKETCH. P11. COPY OF THE SKETCH. P12. COPY OF THE LEGAL ADVICE. P13. COPY OF THE LETTER BY R2 TO R3. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: R1A. COPY OF THE CONSENT. B. COPY OF THE REPORT DTD.15.3.07. C. COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD.1.8.03 BETWEEN R3 AND SRI.DOMINIC THOMAS. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 33439 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had a licence to run a business in room No.VIII/52 of Pala Municipality, of which, the 1st respondent is the Chairperson and the 2nd respondent is the Municipal Secretary. The petitioner wanted renewal of the licence for the year 2007-08. That was rejected on the ground that the petitioner did not produce consent from the landlord of the shop room. The petitioner filed an appeal, which was dismissed, by Ext.P6 order, on the same ground. The petitioner approached this Court and obtained Ext.P7 judgment, in which, this Court categorically held that in view of the decision of this Court in Marimuthu v. Director General of Police [1999 (3) KLT 662], for renewal of licence, no consent from the landlord is necessary. Subsequently, Ext.P9 order was passed by the 2nd respondent granting renewal of licence to the petitioner for shop room No.VIII/52(1). The petitioner is challenging that part of Ext.P9 order where the number of the shop room is shown as VIII/52(1) instead of VIII/52. Now the dispute in this writ petition revolves round the question as to whether the petitioner is entitled to renewal of licence for shop room No.VIII/52 instead of shop room No.VIII/52 (1). w.p.c.33439/07 2 2. The contention of the respondents is that after grant of licence to the petitioner earlier, there was a renumbering since the petitioner's shop room was part of a larger room consisting of two parts, which were not separately numbered and consequently, the portion occupied by the petitioner was renumbered as VIII/52(1) and the other part was retained as VIII/52. 3. After hearing, since the petitioner was already holding the licence for shop room no.VIII/52, I put it to the learned standing counsel for the Municipality as to whether they are willing to give the petitioner renewal of licence with number to the petitioner's room as VIII/52 instead of VIII/52(1), with liberty to renumber the other portion as VIII/52(1). The standing counsel for the Municipality submits that they have no objection in renumbering the petitioner's portion as VIII/52 and to grant renewal of licence to the petitioner for shop room No.VIII/52 renumbering the other portion as VIII/52(1). Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to issue renewal of licence to the petitioner numbering the petitioner's room as VIII/52, instead of VIII/52(1) as done in Ext.P9. Ext.P9 shall be modified accordingly. For future years also the petitioner shall be given licence for VIII/52 provided all other conditions are duly complied with by the petitioner. Orders in this w.p.c.33439/07 3 regard shall be issued, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.33439/07 4 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 33439 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011 O R D E R The files produced in this writ petition by the Municipality are returned to the learned standing counsel for the Municipality. sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE