IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/3RD PHALGUNA, 1938 WP(C).No. 6049 of 2017 (E) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- 1 M/S. HOTEL SWAGATH, VALANCHERRY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SRI. SUNNY MOOKKAN 2 SUNNY MOOKKAN, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. M.I. VARGHESE, CHAIRMAN, HOTEL SWAGATH, VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.C.C.THOMAS (SR.) SRI.NIREESH MATHEW SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1 THE VALANCHERRY MUNICIPALITY VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN- 676 552 2 THE SECRETARY, THE VALANCHERRY MUNICIPALITY VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 552 3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 6049 of 2017 (E) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- ----------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FL-1 LICENSE No.M6 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FIRM BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, MALAPPURAM EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.11.2016 IN WP(C) No.29774/2016 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER No.H1-1672/17 DATED 20.02.2017 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 21.02.2017 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- NIL // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE das A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 6049 of 2017(E) ===================================================== Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2017 JUDGMENT
The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P3 order passed by the Secretary of the respondent Municipality, whereby, an existing D&O license of the petitioner has been suspended, and the application for renewal of license submitted by the petitioner, rejected, based on the directions issued by the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v.K. Balu and another [2017 (1) KHC 26].
2. I have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality.
Although various contentions are raised in the writ petition in its challenge against Ext.P3, I am of the view that in the instant case, since Ext.P3 order refers to a decision of the Municipal Council, and is one that is passed by the Secretary in charge, the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy by way of preferring an appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, within a period of limitation prescribed under the Municipalities Act. Accordingly, I dismiss the writ petition in its -2- W.P.(C). No. 6049 of 2017(E) challenge against Ext.P3 order and relegate the petitioner to his alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions against Ext.P3 order. Taking note of the submission of the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that he would require some time to approach the appellate Tribunal for relief, I stay the operation of Ext.P3 order, for a period of two weeks, so as to enable the petitioner to approach the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, against Ext.P3 order, in the meanwhile.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das/ 22.2.2017