AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devan Ramachandran, J
The singular prayer of the petitioner is that his application, namely Ext.P4, for renewal of his Driving School be directed to be considered by the respondent, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
Sri.I.Dinesh Menon, learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently argued that Ext.P2 notification does not mandate the closure of his client's Driving School, but that he is now being forced to do so and ordered to shift it to a place which is nearly 2.5 kms away. He added that even if his client is finally found liable to do so, he may be given some time to comply with it.
The learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that the petitioner has approached this Court with a speculative cause of action because his application, namely Ext.P4, is still pending. She added that this Court may not make any affirmative declarations in favour of the petitioner, based on his submissions that he has been asked to shift his institution to a place nearly 2.5 kms away. She contended that this is an aspect which will have to be finally decided by the competent Authority, while Ext.P4 is decided.
I find substantial force in the submissions of the learned Senior Government Pleader; and am of the view that it will not be proper for this Court to enter into any conclusions on the petitioner's Ext.P4 application, since it is to be decided at the first instance by the respondent, who is the competent Authority.
Resultantly, I allow this writ petition and direct the respondent to take up Ext.P4 application of the petitioner and dispose it of, adverting to Ext.P2 and after affording an opportunity of being heard to him; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
In order to obtain an expeditious compliance of the afore directions, I direct the petitioner to mark appearance before the respondent at 11 a.m. on 11.03.2022; on which day, the said Authority will either hear him or fix another convenient date for hearing and complete proceedings as ordered above.
In the meanwhile, until the afore exercise is completed, the petitioner will not be forced to close down his institution, but he will not be able to run it without being issued necessary licence pursuant to the afore directions.