The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
“(i) Call for the entire records from the respondents pertaining to the issue raised in the writ petition;
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Panchayath to consider Ext.P5 application of the petitioner for permit to maintenance the mobile cart canteen of the petitioner in tempo van bearing registration No.KCE 1337 of the petitioner which is running in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders after notice and hearing, if necessary, in a time bound manner;
(iii) Grant such other relief this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the grievance of the petitioner has already been projected by way of Ext.P5, which is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent. The prayer is only to cause the same to be considered and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat, who submits that, Ext.P5 in fact has not been submitted by the petitioner.
4. Considering the limited extent of relief sought for, this W.P.(C) No.19290 of 2014 2 Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. The request of the petitioner put forth as per Ext.P5, produced along with the writ petition, would be treated as a valid representation preferred before the respondent Panchayat. The 2nd respondent is directed to pass final orders on Ext.P5, in accordance with law, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested parties, if any, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 2nd respondent, for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp