Kerala High Court
Renish Raphel vs Corporation Of Thrissur on 21 October, 2014
Author: K.Surendra Mohan
Bench: K.Surendra Mohan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/29TH ASWINA, 1936
WP(C).No. 4740 of 2014 (N)
---------------------------
PETITIONER :
--------------------------
RENISH RAPHEL
S/O.RAPHEL, KANNUMPUZHAKOOLA HOUSE, CHIYARAM P.O
SEVANAGAR THRISSUR DISTRICT
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
SMT.MEERA V.MENON
SRI.MAHESH V.MENON
RESPONDENTS :
----------------------------
1. CORPORATION OF THRISSUR
CORPORATION OFFICE
THRISSUR 680 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2. THE SECRETARY
CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, CORPORATION OFFICE
THRISSUR 680001
R1 & 2 BY ADV. SRI.V.J.JOSEPH,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATION
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 4740 of 2014 (N)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF PROFESSIONAL TAX ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P1(A) COPY OF LICENSE FEE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF RENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBITY P2(A) COPY OF RENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF REPLYRECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
---------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A TO JUDGE
AV
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.4740 of 2014
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a person who is conducting sale of fish from the Ollur market under the 1st respondent Corporation. He complains of illegal vending of fish by various persons from stalls put up by the side of the road just outside the fish market. According to the petitioner, the conduct of sale of fish in the said manner is the source of acute nuisance and health problems to the people of the locality. The waste of the fishes are left on the road to rot and decay, contaminating the surroundings, causing acute pollution and nuisance. Such conduct also affects the business of the petitioner. The petitioner has therefore submitted complaints of the respondents. The petitioner has received Ext.P4 reply by which, he has been informed that the issue has been referred to the decision of the Standing Committee for Health. Though the said reply was issued on 26.11.2013. The petitioner complains that no further action has been taken in the matter thereafter. The petitioner therefore, seeks the issue of appropriate directions for working out a solution to the problem.
2. Since the complaint of the petitioner is pending before the 1st respondent, it is only appropriate that the said authority W.P.(C) No.4740 of 2014 2 considers the complaint and takes necessary action to abate the nuisance that is caused. It is evident from Ext.P4 communication that, the Standing Committee of the 1st respondent for Health is in seizin of the matter. However, one fails to understand the reason for the delay in taking necessary action for abatement of the nuisance. It is absolutely necessary that, appropriate remedial action is taken without any further delay, if the complaint of the petitioner is justified.
This writ petition is therefore, disposed of directing the 1st respondent and its Standing Committee for Health to take appropriate action on the complaint made by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV