AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
11 paragraphs · 180 wordsSathish Ninan, J
Respondents 7 to 9 in the writ petition are licensees of a toddy shop bearing No.TS. 28. The petitioner is aggrieved by the proposal to shift the shop
in close proximity to the petitioner's residence. The petitioner contends that it is a thickly populated area and the peaceful residence of the inhabitants
will be affected. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 complaint in the said regard before the third respondent which is stated to be pending
consideration.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
I am of the opinion that it would be sufficient if the third respondent considers the objection/petition of the petitioner with due notice to respondents
7 to 9.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to consider Ext.P2 petition submitted by the petitioner with due notice to
and granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 7 to 9, prior to grant of licence to function near the residence of the petitioner,
if licence has not been already granted.