The court necessitates administrative review before enforcing removal orders on a petitioner's prior agreements.

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

" I. To Call for the records leading to issuance of Exhibits P8 & P9 Letters and quash the same by issuing a Writ of Certiorari.

II. And issue and grant such other and further reliefs, directions or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including costs.

III. Award cost of these proceedings."

[SIC]

2. The petitioner is an advertising agency firm in the name and style ‘Graphon Innovative Digital Solutions’. The petitioner firm entered into Ext.P1 agreement with the 4th respondent municipality as part of the project ‘Beautification of Kasaragod Town’ to set up and maintain pole kiosk, street light poles, landscaping and erecting small-sized advertisement boards within the road median of the road stretching a distance of 575.95 meters starting from Sulthan Gold to Pallam Junction. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts. P8 & P9 letters issued by the 3^rd respondent to the 4^th respondent, directing them to remove the advertisement boards placed by the petitioner with immediate effect. Hence, this Writ Petition.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader.

4. When this case came up for consideration on

10.10.2025, this Court passed the following order:

" Admitted.

2. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5. Learned Standing Counsel takes notice for respondent No.4. Respondents may file their statement/counter affidavit, if any.

On a consideration of the facts and materials on record, particularly after going through Ext.P11 letter issued by the 4^th respondent to the third respondent, I am satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to an interim order. Hence, I direct the respondents to defer the implementation of Exts.P8 and P9 orders for a period of one month."

5. This Court passed such an order after perusing Ext.P11 letter. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think this Writ Petition need not be retained here. Petitioner can be allowed to submit a representation before the 3^rd respondent, and the 3^rd respondent can be directed to consider that representation along with Ext.P11. Till then, the interim order can continue.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. Petitioner is free to submit a representation, narrating the grievance raised in this writ petition before the 3^rd respondent within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

2. Once the representation is received, the 3^rd respondent will consider the same along with Ext.P11 communication of the 4^th respondent, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 4^th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of the representation.

3. If the representation is submitted as directed above, all further proceedings based on Exts.P8 and P9 shall be kept in abeyance.

Sd/-