IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
RASHEED M – Appellant
Versus
THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER AND SUB COLLECTOR KOZHIKODE – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 33715 OF 2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grant of writ petition based on exemption claim. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court heard arguments from both sides. (Para 3) |
| 3. direction for authority to consider application. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"i. Issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading Ext.P2 complaint dated 15/03/2024 by the 2nd respondent and to quash the original of the same.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus declaring that being a petty manufacturer who himself manufactures and sells food articles as a petty retailer coming under the purview of the Section 31 (2) of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 , the petitioner is exempted from the purview of the Act.
iii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the
2nd respondent or the competent among the respondents to issue registration U/Sec.31(2) of the Act.
iv. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 4 to consider issuance of FSSAI License to the 2nd petitioner without insisting for a No Objection Certificate from the Principal, Medical College, Kozhikode.
v. Issue any other order, or direction, this Honourable Court deems fit to grant under the fact and circumstances of this case."
[SIC]
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, even though an application was submitted for license as evident by Ext.P8 receipt, the same was not considered for want of consent from the 5th respondent. The petitioners relied on Ext.P9 order of the Civil court, by which there is an injunction order in favour of the 2nd petitioner. There are other connected reliefs also in the Writ Petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.
4. After hearing both sides, I am of the considered opinion that there can be a direction to the authority concerned to consider the license application in the light of Ext.P9 injunction order within a time frame. All other contentions raised by the petitioners are left open.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The competent authority among respondent Nos.1 to 4 will consider the license application submitted by the petitioners as evident by Ext.P8 receipt, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, taking into consideration Ext.P9 order of the Civil court.
2. Till final orders are passed as directed above, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners.
3. All other contentions raised by the petitioners in this Writ Petition are left open.
Sd/-
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.