WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016
PETITIONER/S:
1 STEPHEN SUNNYMON PETER GOMEZ
S/O.LATE PETER GOMEZ, 53 YEARS, SHARON GARDENS,
SGRA-221, KOTTAMUGAL, NALANCHIRA P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
SMT.WILBY GOMEZ, D/O.THRESIA FERIANDEZ, AGED 71
YEARS, SHARON GARDENS, SGRA-221, KOTTAMUGAL,
NALANCHIRA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 SHEEBA SUNNY GOMEZ
W/O.STEPHEN SUNNYMON PETER GOMEZ AGED 50 YEARS,
SHARON GARDENS, SGRA-221 KOTTAMUGAL, NALANCHIRA
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY
HOLDER SMT.WILBY GOMEZ D/O.THRESIA FERIANDEZ, AGED
71 YEARS, SHARON GARDENS, SGRA-221, KOTTAMUGAL,
NALANCHIRA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SRI.S.ABHILASH
SMT.RENY ANTO
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
CORPORATION OFFICE, PALAYALM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
695033 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 THE KERALA STATE YOUTH WELFARE BOARD
KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695043,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.
3 HLL LIFE CARE LTD.HITES
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT DIVISION ADARSH,
T.C.6/1718(1), VETTAMUKKU, THIRUMALA P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695006 REPRESENTED BY ITS
WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016 2
MANAGING DIRECTOR.
BY ADVS.
SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.)
SRI.P.K.MANOJ KUMAR, SC
SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM
SRI.E.K.MADHAVAN
SMT.J.SURYA
SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016 3
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C.) No. 32680 of 2016
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers : "i. To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to strictly implement Ext.P3 stop memo and initiate proceedings under Rule 18 of Kerala Municipality Building Rules against the illegal construction of storage/sump tank in the property of the 2nd respondent within a time bound manner.
ii. To pass such other reliefs that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." [SIC]
2. The main prayer in the writ petition is to implement Ext.P3 stop memo. In Ext.P3, the 1st respondent directed the 2nd respondent not to do any construction activities in the area mentioned in Ext.P3. The grievance of the petitioners is that no further action is taken after Ext.P3. It is also admitted by the petitioners that the civil suit is filed by the petitioners WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016 4 and that is filed for permanent prohibitory injunction against the 2nd respondent and an interim injunction is also passed in favour of the petitioners. But the grievance of the petitioners is that no further proceedings is initiated after Ext.P3. Hence, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-Corporation and also the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd and 3rd respondents.
4. The counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that no construction activity is carried out afterExt.P3 order. The same is recorded. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that no further action is taken after Ext.P3. If Ext.P3 became final and the same is not modified or varied by the competent authority, the 1st respondent is bound to proceed in accordance to law after Ext.P3.
5. Therefore, this writ petition can be disposed of recording the submission of the 3rd respondent that no construction activity is carried out, after Ext.P3 and there can be a direction to the 1st respondent to proceed in accordance WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016 5 to law from the stage of Ext.P3, if there is no prohibitory order or Ext.P3 is not varied or modified by a competent authority.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :
1) The 1st respondent is directed to proceed with Ext.P3 in accordance to law, if it is not varied or modified by the competent authority or court.
2) The submission of the 3rd respondent that no construction activity is carried out after issuance of Ext.P3 is recorded.
SD/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2016 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32680/2016 PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1 COPY OF TAX RECEIPT REGARDING THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY DT.24-9-2016 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, KUDAPPANAKUNNU. P2 COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY R1 TO R2 DT.7-11-2014.
P3 COPY OF STOP MEMO ISSUED BY R1 TO R2 DT/.27-10-2015.
P4 COPY OF PLAINT IN OS 2240/2015. P5 COPY OF NOTICE COMMUNICATING THE ORDER OF
INJUNCTION FROM THE MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN OS 2240/15 DT.24- 11-2015.