K.O. MAMMEN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Called out for final hearing.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd to 5th respondents, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the 1st and 6th respondents, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for 7th and 8th respondents and the learned counsel appearing for the 9th respondent.

(3.) The main grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the 7th to 9th respondents were running restaurant-cum- bar in their respective premises without obtaining requisite licence. Another allegation made in the petition is about the illegality of certain construction carried out on premises No. 11 and 11/1. As far as the respondent No.9 is concerned, there is an objection filed placing reliance on CL-2 licence granted in the name and style of 'Cyber Wines'. A copy of the licence has been annexed to the objections.