Cancellation of Trade Licences without due process and proper notice constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice.

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 9th day of November, 2022 The petitioners are aggrieved by the non-renewal/

cancellation of Trade Licence issued to them by the 4th respondent-Municipality.

2. The petitioners state that they are running various businesses in shoprooms in a building owned by the Municipality. When the Municipal authorities initiated proceedings to evict the petitioners, they approached this Court filing W.P.(C.) No.27965/2021. This Court directed the respondents to take up, consider and pass orders on the appeals preferred by the petitioners and pending before the Municipal Council, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the judgment. This Court directed that any proceedings pursuant to the notices issued to the petitioners should be kept in abeyance till then.

3. The petitioners state that they have preferred appeals and this Court has directed the Municipal Council to consider the appeals. Their Trade Licences were renewed for the year

2022-'23. Some of the petitioners submitted applications for change of the nature of business. To the surprise and predicament of the petitioners, now notices have been issued to the petitioners stating that the Trade Licences issued to the petitioners for the year 2022-'23 stand cancelled as the Municipal authorities have already taken a decision to evict the occupants of the building in which the petitioners are running business. It is aggrieved by the cancellation of licence and denial of licence to change of business that the petitioners are before this Court.

4. Counsel for the petitioners would submit that communications are issued to the petitioners in violation of the principles of natural justice. As per Rule 22 of the Kerala Municipalities (Issue of Licence to Dangerous Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 2011, the licences can be cancelled only after giving notice and after affording opportunity of hearing.

5. The counsel further urged that the petitioners have already preferred appeals which are pending before the Municipal Council and this Court in W.P.(C.) No.27965/2021 has directed the respondents not to evict the petitioners till a decision is taken in the appeals. In such circumstances, orders denying/cancelling licence, amount to overreaching the judgment of this Court.

6. Standing Counsel entered appearance for the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel denied all the material allegations made by the petitioners in the writ petitions. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the building in which the petitioners are running their business belongs to the Municipality and is in a very dilapidated condition. It poses threat not only to the occupants of the building but to the general public also. Therefore, Municipality made a proposal to demolish the building for reconstruction.

7. It was without noticing this fact that the Trade Licences were issued to the occupants of the building for the year 2022-'23. As the issuance of licence was without noting a material fact, the same was cancelled. Those notices/orders cannot be impugned by the petitioners on any of the grounds urged in the writ petitions. The petitioners have alternate remedy in the matter and for that reason also, the writ petitions are not maintainable, contended the Standing Counsel.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents. 9. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioners are occupying the shoprooms belonging to the Municipality on the basis of licences granted. They are running businesses on the strength of Trade Licences issued by the Municipality. Now, the Municipality has a proposal to demolish the building. Notices of eviction were issued to the petitioners. The petitioners approached the Municipal Council preferring statutory appeals. In the judgment in W.P.(C.) No.27965/2021, this Court has directed the respondents to consider the appeal and not to evict the pe