- (1.) This appeal is against a judgement and order of learned Trial Judge, dated 16th October, 2007, by which the learned Trial Judge, after discussion in details, ordered ultimately as follows:- "The Corporation is directed to proceed to consider only those applications received by it in accordance with law and in the light of the observations contained above and to pass appropriate orders on all the applications as early as possible but positively within six weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this judgement and order."
(2.) The petitioners applied for renewal of enlistment for operating cycle van, cycle rickshaw and hand pulled cart etc. Therefore, the petitioners prayed for issue of a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to grant licence in favour of the members of the petitioners. Admitted position was that the Corporation Authority did not take any decision on their applications- whether renewal, as prayed for, should be granted or not. Before the learned Single Judge, argument was advanced by both the parties as to justifiability or unjustifiability of granting or refusing enlistment. Learned Trial Judge has discussed the matter in great detail.
(3.) Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and going through the petition, we find that the Corporation had not taken any decision at all. According to us, the writ court cannot take decision at the first instance on a subject which is essentially taken by the statutory and executive authority. The writ court can only scrutinise the decision taken by the executive authority within the parameter of power of judicial review. The writ court should not go into great detail as to the justifiability or unjustifiability with regard to the issue of renewal of enlistment.;