K.P. Sameer vs Tanur Grama Panchayath on 2 March, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6700 of 2009(F)


1. K.P. SAMEER, S/O. K.P. ABDU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. TANUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY, TANUR GRAMA

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :02/03/2009

 O R D E R
                             S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                      ==================

                        W.P(C).No.6700 of 2009

                      ==================

                 Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009

                             J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is engaged in the business of selling chicken in a

building of his own for which the petitioner had a licence. The

petitioner filed an application on 19.8.2008 for renewal of the licence.

The same has been rejected by the Panchayat. Alleging that the same

is beyond the period prescribed under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act

and therefore, the petitioner has already obtained a deemed licence,

the petitioner approached the Tribunal for Local Self Government

Institutions. By Ext.P2 order, the Tribunal allowed that appeal ex

parte. Subsequently, the Panchayat filed a writ petition, in which, by

Ext.P6 judgment, this Court set aside the ex parte order and directed

reconsideration of the appeal after affording an opportunity to the

Panchayat to produce documents and contest the matter. The

petitioner now submits that although Ext.P2 order has been set aside,

the appeal having been restored to the file of the Tribunal, the interim

order earlier granted by the Tribunal also revives and therefore, the

petitioner is entitled to conduct the business pending disposal of the

appeal.

2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Panchayat

opposes the same. According to him, since the Panchayat has rejected

2

the application within the time prescribed in the Panchayat Raj Act,

there is no question of any deemed licence. I am of opinion that these

are all matters which the petitioner has to take up with the Tribunal. If

the petitioner wants an interim order, the petitioner can approach the

Tribunal for the same also. The learned Standing Counsel for the

Panchayat points out that the matter stands posted before the Tribunal

today.

3. In that view, this writ petition is dismissed without

prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the Tribunal

appropriately. If the petitioner moves the Tribunal for interim orders,

orders on the same shall be passed expeditiously.

Sd/-

sdk+                                             S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

          ///True copy///




                              P.A. to Judge