SMT. SHERLY WILSON AND WILSON P.I. S/O. ITTOOP Vs. THE CHALAKKUDY MUNICIPALITY AND THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this writ petition is against Ext.P9, an order passed by the 2nd respondent declining NOC, sought for by the petitioners to shift a medical store to the property purchased by the 2nd petitioner as per Ext.P4 sale deed.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that, petitioners were running a medical store in the name and style, M/s. New Supriya Medicals, in a plot of land allotted by the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioners the said medical store was sold to one Sri. Bhuvanachandran, who is running the store even now. Even at that time, the petitioners were owning another medical store under the name and style, Seena Medicals, which was established at a rented premises. While so, by Ext.P4 sale deed, the 2nd petitioner purchased a residential building in a plot of land developed by the 2nd respondent, which is stated to be close to M/s. New Supriya Medicals. Thereupon an application was made to the Municipality for a licence in order to shift M/s. Seena Medicals to the new premises purchased by the 2nd petitioner.

(3.) EXT .P7 was challenged before this Court by filing WP(c). No. 25996/09. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P8 judgment holding that the issue whether the petitioners should be allowed to accommodate their medical store in a residential premises by change of user is a matter for the 2nd respondent to decide. Accordingly, it was directed that when an appropriate request is received from the petitioners, the Secretary of the 2nd respondent will consider whether they could be permitted to open a medical store at the premises in question. Petitioners state that accordingly, an application was made by them and that on such application Ext.P9 order was passed by the Secretary of the 2nd respondent declining to issue NOC. It is thereupon that this writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P9 order.