High Court Kerala High Court

Jose vs Oachira Grama Panchayath on 24 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
Jose vs Oachira Grama Panchayath on 24 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35057 of 2010(F)


1. JOSE,S/O. ANCHALOOSE, AGED 50 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. BABY, PUTHEPURAYIL,

                        Vs



1. OACHIRA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OACHIRA.P.O.
                       ...       Respondent

2. OACHIRA TEMPLE ADMINISTRATION BOARD,

3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.  K.SIJU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :24/11/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                  W.P.(C) No. 35057 of 2010 F
             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
         Dated this the 24th day of November, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

According to the petitioners, they are licenced to

conduct an amusement park at the compound of Ochira

Parabrahmam Temple. It is stated that the licence granted

was for 12 days from 17-11-2010. The grievance of the

petitioners is that respondents 3 to 5 are not permitting them

to open the stalls on the allegation that what the petitioners

propose to carry on is prohibited under the provisions of the

Gaming Act.

2. Learned Government Pleader has obtained

instructions in the matter and submits that, if as stated by the

petitioners, what is proposed to be carried on are not activities

which are otherwise not prohibited, the respondents have no

objection in the petitioners opening the stalls at the

amusement park.

In the light of the submissions made, I dispose of the writ

W.P.(C) No.35057/10
: 2 :

petition directing that, if the activities proposed to be carried

on by the petitioners are otherwise not objectionable in law,

the respondents shall not prevent the petitioners from carrying

on the activities as per the licence that is said to have been

obtained by them.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks