IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 26047 OF 2013
PETITIONER:
M.ABOOBACKER SIDDIQUE
MAVILA ROAD P.O, PARAVANADUKKAM,
KALANAD, KASARGOD PIN-671 317.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.C.JAMES
SRI.K.KUNHIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 KASARAGODE MUNICIPALITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
KASARAGODE DISTRICT - 671 121.
2 T.K. IBRAHIM, S/O.KUNHAMATH MUSALIAR,
KUNIYA P.O, PERIYA,
KASARAGODE DISTRICT - 671 321.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.M.KURIAN
SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD
SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD
SMT.MINI V.MENON
SMT.S.SANTHY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 26047 OF 2013
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No. 26047 of 2013
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of July, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
"(i) to issue a writ of certiorari or such other appropriate writ order or direction to the 1st respondent to call up the records and proceedings leading upto Ext.P9 and quash Exts.P7, P8 and P9;
(ii) to declare that 1st respondent have no right or jurisdiction to issue Exts.P7, P8 and P9 so as to harm the petitioner by preventing the petitioner from conducting the business in two rooms and ultimately evict the petitioner by malafide action on the part of respondents 1 and 2;
(iii) to issue a direction to the 1 st respondent to receive the fine for the irregular construction and to regularize the construction of the stair case;
(iv) to issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1 st respondent to withdraw Exts.P7, P8 and P9 as far as those notices affects the petitioner adversely;
(v) to stay all further proceedings in pursuant to Exts.P7, P8 and P9 pending disposal of the Writ Petition;
WP(C) NO. 26047 OF 2013 3
(vi) to grant such other reliefs as may be deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case."[SIC]
2. The main challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P7, P8 and P9. Exts.P7, P8 and P9 are issued to the 2nd respondent herein. The counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge those notices.
There is no representation for the petitioner also. Even though an interim stay of demolishing any portion of the building was granted on 04.11.2013, for a period of two weeks, the same was not extended thereafter. In such circumstances, I think the prayers in the writ petition are infructuous.
Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE WP(C) NO. 26047 OF 2013 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26047/2013 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXT.P1 - THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 2-5-2012 FOR THE PRIOD FROM 01-05-2012 TO 31-03-
2013EXT.P2 - THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LEASE DEED DATED 1-5-1997 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE LEASE DEED DATED 17-6-2009.
EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE RENT RECEIPTS DATED 13-7-2013, 30-07-2013. EXT.P4(A) - TRUE COPY OF LICENCE FEE RECEIPTS.
EXT.P5 - THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CONSENT DEED DATED 17-4-2012 EXECUTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF THE 2ND RESPNDENT AND HIS WIFE AISHA IBRAHIM. EXT.P6 - THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE ENTIRE SITUATION OF THE BUILDING.
EXT.P7 - THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROIVISIONAL ORDER OF THE SECRETARY DATED 4-8-2011 PASSED UNDER SECTION 406(2).
EXT.P8 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 25-8-2011 SERVED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17-9-2011 FROM THE SECRETARY OF THE MUNIIPALITY SERVED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE