IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
B. RADHAKRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL KERALA FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICES – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7192 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's application for renewal of fire noc was denied due to deficiencies. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner claimed deficiencies rectified and sought reconsideration. (Para 3) |
| 3. court ordered reconsideration of the petitioner's application. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the owner of a Bar hotel having a three star classification. Petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 application to the Fire Department for renewal of the fire NOC for his hotel. However, it was rejected by Ext.P6. The said order was later set aside by this Court in W.P.(C) No.48389 of 2025 and directed a reconsideration. Again, after reconsideration, the department issued Ext.P11 and Ext.P14 orders, rejecting the application, pointing out certain deficiencies.
2. According to the petitioner, consequent to Ext.P14, he filed Ext.P15 application for extension of time to rectify the defects pointed out and approached this Court in this writ petition seeking a direction to consider his application for extension of time. By an order dated 24.02.2026, this Court recorded the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the rectification work will be completed within two weeks and hence stayed the coercive action pursuant to Ext.P4 till today.
3. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deficiencies pointed out in Ext.P14, have been rectified and that, if 3rd respondent reconsiders Ext.P3 application, it would be evident that the deficiencies are not in existence and the petitioner would become entitled for grant of renewal of No Objection Certificate.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader and on a perusal of the various documents produced in this writ petition, including Ext.P14, I am of the view that if the petitioner has rectified the deficiencies pointed out in Ext.P14, certainly the application submitted as Ext.P3 can be reconsidered.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to reconsider petitioner's application for renewal of fire NOC, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, notwithstanding Ext.P14.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
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.