A petitioner is entitled to deemed license renewal under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act due to lack of timely decision on renewal applications.

JUDGMENT

These two writ petitions are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these writ petitions by a common judgment. I will first consider W.P.(C.) No. 16433/2024. The prayers in this writ petition are extracted hereunder :

i. “To issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction, to call for the entire records culminated in Ext.P16 and to quash the same;

ii. To declare that the petitioner is entitled for deemed renewal of license as per Ext.P12 application since no decision on the application was communicated to the petitioner within 30 days as mandated by Sec.236(3) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act , 1994;

iii. To declare that renewal of license for the Canteen/Restaurant covered by Ext.P1 and P2 which has been functioning with valid licence for the last 19 years continuously, cannot be denied merely based on a mistaken entry in the Building Tax Assessment Register and that such mistaken entry in the Building Tax Assessment Register cannot be treated as a conclusive proof of the nature of occupancy;

iv. To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 4th Respondent to issue license to the petitioner in paper form for the year 2024-25 on the Ext.P12 application, in view of the deemed license acquired by him u/Sec 236 of the Panchayat Raj Act and also in view of Exts.P3 to P11 licenses granted earlier from 2004 onwards, expeditiously and within a specific time frame as may be ordered by this Hon’ble Court;

v. To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd Respondent to take immediate steps to correct mistake, if any, in the ‘nature of occupancy’ of the building covered by Exts.P1 and P2 in the Building Tax Assessment Register being maintained by the 4th Respondent Panchayath;

vi. For all the costs of the Writ petition vii. For such other and further reliefs, that are deemed fit under the circumstances of the case”[sic]

2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to quash Ext.P16. Ext.P16 is a communication from the 4^th respondent-Panchayat stating that the nature of occupancy of the building where the petitioner is conducting the canteen is to be changed from residential to commercial. The petitioner submitted Ext.P12 application for renewal of the license for the financial year 2024-25 and in that application, Ext.P16 communication was sent. When that writ petition came up for consideration before this Court on 23.04.2024, this Court stayed all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P16 order. That order is extended regularly. Subsequently, the license was also renewed.

3. WP(C) No. 21707/2024 is filed with following prayers :

i. “To issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction, to call for the entire records culminated in Ext.P13 and to quash the same;

ii. To declare that the petitioner is liable to pay electricity charges to the 3rd Respondent at the exact unit rate as being charged by the Electricity Board (KSEB) in each demand notice being issued to the 3rd Respondent and that no service charge can be levied by the 3rd Respondent on account of electricity being consumed by the petitioner in the tenanted premises;

iii. To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd Respondent to levy electricity charge from the petitioner at the same rate per Unit as being charged by the Electricity Board (KSEB) in each demand notice;

iv. To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd Respondent to take steps to install a separate Electricity Metre from the Kerala State Electricity Board for the tenanted premises being occupied by the petitioner on the strength of Ext.P2 & P3