The High Court cannot exercise writ jurisdiction if the statutory period for appealing has expired, reinforcing adherence to legislative intent regarding statutory limitations.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“(i). call for the records connecting Exhibit P26 order dated 7/5/2025 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash Exhibit P26 by issuing a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction;

(ii). issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the 2nd respondent to issue paper form of Trade License to the petitioner in view of pendency of Exhibit P-9 Application, in terms of Section 447 (6) of the Kerala Municipalities Act and renew the same for the subsequent years, within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court ;

(iii). Petitioner also prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the English translation of the documents produced in the Vernacular Language. And (iv). Such other reliefs as deem fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case.” (SIC)

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P26 order issued by the Secretary to the 1^st respondent Municipality. Admittedly, Ext.P26 is an appealable order. In the light of the principle laid down by this Court in Suresh K. v. Municipal Corporation of Kollam [2026 (1) KHC 406] , this Court need not entertain this writ petition. This Court in the above judgment observed like this:

“10. It is a settled position that once the period prescribed for limitation for filing an appeal is over and the additional one month for which the Tribunal can condone the delay is also over, the Tribunal cannot entertain an appeal. Admittedly the petitioner has not filed any statutory appeal within the period prescribed or within the period which can be condoned by the tribunal.In such a situation, the question to be decided is whether this Court can entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India if there is manifest error in the order.

11. The Apex Court in Assistant Commissioner (CT), LTU, Kakinada and Others v. M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited [2020 KHC6377], observed like this:

“15. We may now revert to the Full Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), which had adopted the view taken by the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Panoli Intermediate (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2015 Guj. 97 and also of the Karnataka High Court in Phoenix Plasts Company vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeal - I), Bangalore, 2013 (298) ELT 481 (Kar.). The logic applied in these decisions proceeds on fallacious premise. For, these decisions are premised on the logic that provision such as S.31 of the 1995 Act, cannot curtail the jurisdiction of the High Court under Art.226 and Art.227 of the Constitution. This approach is faulty. It is not a matter of taking away the jurisdiction of the High Court. In a given case, the assessee may approach the High Court before the statutory period of appeal expires to challenge the assessment order by way of writ petition on the ground that the same is without jurisdiction or passed in excess of jurisdiction - by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction including in flagrant disregard of law and rules of procedure or in violation of principles of natural justice, where no procedure is specified. The High Court may accede to such a challenge and can also non - suit the petitioner on the ground that alternative efficacious remedy is available and that be invoked by the writ petitioner. However, if the writ petitioner choses to approach the High Court after expiry of the maximum limitation period of 60 days prescribed under S.31 of the 2005 Act, the High Court cannot disregard the statutory period for redressal of the grievance and entertain the writ petition of such a party as a matter of course. Doing so would be in the teeth of the principle underlying the dictum of a three - Judge Bench of this Court in Oil an