Naushad v. Secretary to Government, Local Self Government Department, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/26TH POUSHA 1934** ## **WP(C).No. 7496 of 2008 (P) --------------------------** ## **PETITIONER :** - **-----------** **NAUSHAD, MUKALUVILA KULAPPADAM, NEDUMPANA P.O.,KOLLAM.** **BY ADVS.SRI.S.M.ALTHAF SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR).** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** **--------------** **1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH,** **THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **3. NEDUMPANA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, NEDUMPANA P.O.,KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **4. NISAMMUDDIN, THEKKEPUNNAVILA VEEDU, NEDUMPANA P.O.** - **5. BADRUDDIN, CHARUVILA PUTHENVEEDU, KULAPPADAM, NEDUMPANA P.O.** - **6. A.SHAUKATH, SHEEBA MANZIL, KULAPPADAM, NEDUMPANA P.O.** - **ADDL.R4, R5 & R6 ARE IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 18-07-2008 IN I.A.NO.8930/2008.** **R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN.** **R3 BY ADVS. SRI.V.V.RAJA &** **SRI.R.RANJITH** **ADDL.R5 & R6 BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).No. 7496 of 2008 (P)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-** **EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 22-02-2008. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE DATED 29-02-2008.** **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL.** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A TO JUDGE** **amk** ## S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== ## W.P.(C).No. 7496 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 16[th] day of January, 2013 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a resident of Nedumpana Grama Panchayat in Kollam district. The petitioner is aggrieved by two actions of the 3[rd] respondent Panchayat. The first is in auctioning the right to vend meat in the public markets within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat, without establishing a slaughter house as mandated by the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and the Rules made thereunder. The second is regarding the right of the Panchayat to auction the right to conduct shops in private markets at Kulappadam and Velichikkala within the Panchayat. The petitioner submits that both the actions of the Panchayat are prohibited by decisions of this Court in **John Mathew v. Vechoochira Grama Panchayat** , 1999 (3) KLT 243, **Peter v. Perayam Panchayat** , 1996 (1) KLT 362 and **Salim v. Dy. Director of Panchayat** , 2003 (3) KLT 516. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: “(i) call for the records leading to issuance of Ext.P1 and quash w.p.c.7496/08 - : 2 :- the same to the extent of 1[st] and 2[nd] right till establishing a slaughter house, by issue of writ of certiorari. - (ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing 3[rd] respondent to establish a permanent slaughter house as provided in S.229 & 231 of the Act. - (iii) to declare that the 3[rd] respondent has no right to auction out the right to conduct shop in private markets namely, Kulappadam and Velichikkala. - (iv) to declare that the 3[rd] respondent has no right to auction out the right to conduct meat stall till establishing a slaughter house as provided in the Act & Rules.” 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3[rd] respondent. The stand of the Panchayat in the counter affidavit and the arguments of the counsel for the Panchayat is that the Panchayat does not have a suitable place for housing a slaughter house and, therefore, the Panchayat could not establish a slaughter house within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat. Instead, they are availing of the facilities available with the slaughter house established by the Kollam Corporation, which is perfectly in accordance with the Act and Rules is the contention raised. It is also stated that the petitioner has no locus standi to file this writ petition, insofar as none of the persons participated in the auction for right to vend meat and none of the licensees of the private markets has come forward to challenge the actions of the Panchayat complained of. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. w.p.c.7496/08 - : 3 :- 4. The petitioner is admittedly a resident of the 3[rd] respondent Panchayat. The activities complained of in this writ petition are matters affecting the health and welfare of the residents of the Panchayat. That being so, the petitioner has a personal right in respect of those matters and he is certainly entitled to maintain this writ petition in his own interest apart from public interest as well. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the contention of the Panchayat that the petitioner does not have locus standi to file this writ petition. Even apart from that, coming from the mouth of a Panchayat, such a contention does not look good at all. The Panchayat is expected to safeguard the health of the residents of the Panchayat and it is their statutory duty as well. When residents are complaining that they are not performing their statutory duties in accordance with law, the Panchayat cannot hide behind such technical contentions especially when the health of the residents of the Panchayat is at stake. 5. As far as the first grievance of the petitioner is concerned, the issue is squarely covered by the decision in **John Mathew's** case (supra). In that case, a learned Single Judge of this Court has held thus in paragraph 7: w.p.c.7496/08 - : 4 :- 7. Having regard to the object and purpose for which slaughter houses have to be established in the Panchayat and since no slaughter house as contemplated under the provisions of the Act and the Rules mentioned above has shown to be established, the first respondent Panchayat is interdicted from auctioning the right to vend meat in the two public markets mentioned above or in other places within the first respondentPanchayat until public or licensed slaughter houses are established in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. Since the meat is a requirement of the people of the Panchayat for their food and since it is an obligation on the part of the Panchayat to provide for meat stalls in the public markets maintained by the Panchayat and since by the present order the first respondent is interdicted from auctioning the right to vend meat in the places mentioned in Ext.P1 notice, the first respondent will take immediate steps for establishment of slaughter houses as provided under the Act and the Rules mentioned above as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.” Therefore, the law that without establishing a slaughter house, a Panchayat cannot auction right to vend meat in the markets of the Panchayat is well settled. Admittedly, the Panchayat has not established a slaughter house within the Panchayat. The contention of the 3[rd] respondent is that they are utilizing the facilities of the slaughter house established by the Kollam Corporation also does not find favour with me. The slaughter house of the Kollam Corporation is at least 20 kilometers away from the Panchayat. If the vendors of meat are expected to take cattle to the slaughter house of Kollam Corporation and bring the meat back for sale within the Panchayat, either the customers will have to shell out more money to purchase meat or w.p.c.7496/08 - : 5 :- else they will not get healthy meat. Both are against the interests of the residents of the Panchayat. In any event, when this Court has held that the Panchayat cannot conduct auction the right to vend meat without establishing a slaughter house, the Panchayat cannot take a stand that they are utilizing the facilities of a slaughter house 20 kilometers away from the Panchayat. In the above circumstances, I interdict the Panchayat from auctioning the right to vend meat within the markets of the Panchayat until the Panchayat establishes a slaughter house as provided in the Panchayat Raj (Slaughter Houses & Meat Stalls) Rules 1996. 6. I am of opinion that it is also the bounden duty of the Panchayat to establish a slaughter house. Otherwise, the same will promote illegal trading in meat, which has to be prevented at any cost in the interest of the health of the residents of the Panchayat. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the 3[rd] respondent to see that a proper slaughter house is established within the Panchayat within a period of one year. 7. The question as to whether the Panchayat can auction the right to conduct shops in private markets is also no more res integra. A Division Bench of this Court has in **Peter's case** (supra) held that the Panchayat has no right to auction out the w.p.c.7496/08 - : 6 :- right to conduct meat stalls in private markets. That has been followed in **Salim's case** (supra). In view of the said decisions, it is declared that the 3[rd] respondent Panchayat is not legally competent to sell the right to conduct shops in private markets in Kulappadam and Velichikkala or in other private markets within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat. But certainly the Panchayat can inspect the shops in private markets and ensure that the conduct of the private market by the licencees and conduct of business by the persons who conduct shops in the market are in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The writ petition is allowed as above. sdk+ Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge