IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
LATHISH R, GEETHA R, ARIFA, K VENUGOPAL – Appellant
Versus
THE ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 46211 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners claim auction harms business. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. courts opinion on representation process. (Para 3) |
| 3. writ petition disposed with directions. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondents not to permit any persons to put up temporary shops on the road side margin in front of the petitioners’ shop rooms covered in Exhibits P1, P2, P3 and P4 licenses in pursuance to any auction conducted by the 1st respondent in connection with the annual Chirappu Festival in Mullackal Rajarajeswari Temple, Alappuzha;
ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order prohibiting the 1st and 2nd respondents from taking any further steps in pursuance to any auction conducted by them under Exhibit P9 in respect of the road side margin in front of petitioners’ shop rooms covered in Exhibits P1, P2, P3 and P4 licenses;
iii) to pass an order dispensing with filing of English translation of Malayalam documents produced as Exhibits in the writ Petition(Civil);
and iv) to issue such other appropriate writ, order or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper to issue in the circumstances of the case.”
[SIC]
2. The petitioners are having shops by the side of Mullackal Road near Rajarajeswari Temple at Mullackal, Alappuzha, and doing business in their shops for their livelihood. They are aggrieved by the conduct of auction of road margin in front of their shop rooms for putting up temporary shops in connection with the Chirappu festival of Mullackal Rajarajeswari Temple by the respondent Municipality. According to the petitioners, this will cause problem to the business of the petitioners.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
4. I am of the considered opinion that this writ petition need not be retained here. The petitioners can be allowed to file a representation about the same before the Municipality, and there can be a direction to consider the same.
Therefore this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
i) The petitioners are free to file a representation before the 2nd respondent, within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment ii) If such a representation is received, the 2nd respondent will consider the same, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the representation.
Iii) If the representation is submitted as directed above, the auctioning of the place in front of the petitioners shop shall be deferred till a decision is taken in it.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.