OMANA THOMAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P1 notice by which she has been directed not to carry on the business of conducting a chicken stall in her property. According to the petitioner, she has been carrying on her business for the past many years. But admittedly, she has not obtained any licence from the Panchayat. Therefore, I do not find anything wrong with Ext.P1 notice. The petitioner has no right to carry on the business without obtaining necessary licence from the Panchayat.

(2.) IT is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P2 application for licence was submitted by her to the second respondent on 11-9-2012. However, she complains that no orders have been passed thereon till date.

(3.) A separate counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent. The third respondent is a neighbour of the petitioner. He has produced Ext.R3(a) along with I.A.14344/2012 which is a copy of Panchayat resolution deciding not to grant a licence to the petitioner. Since the petitioner's application has already been rejected, it is contended that the petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in this writ petition.