P. Jayakumar vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 11755 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

     FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                      WP(C).No.20736 OF 2018(N)


PETITIONER:

               P. JAYAKUMAR
               S/O. A.G. PILLAI, AGED 62 YEARS,RETIRED BANK OFFICER,
               RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.43/699,'NAVALAKSHMI', K.K. ROAD,
               OPP. KETTUVALLAM RESTAURANT,KALOOR P.O.,
               ERNAKULAM - 682 017.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.K.MADHUSOODANAN
               SRI.MATHEW JACOB (KUNNATHU)
               SRI.T.G.PAUL
               SRI.SYRIAC JOSEPH

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,LOCAL SELF
               GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

      2        THE SECRETARY
               CORPORATION OF KOCHIN, ERNAKULAM JETTY,
               KOCHI - 682 011.

      3        PRABHAVATHY
               'PRATHIBA', K.K. ROAD, KALOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682
               017, PRESENTLY RESIDING ATDEEPAM, COCHIN - 682 030.

               R3 BY ADV. SRI.JITHIN PAUL VARGHESE
               R2 BY ADV. SRI.R.HARISHANKAR
               R1 BY SRI.M.R.DHANIL,GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD            ON
09.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.20736 OF 2018(N)                  2




                                JUDGMENT

Dated this the 9th day of April 2021

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner basically challenging Exhibits

P3 and P4 notices issued by the Executive Engineer of the Corporation of

Cochin dated 12.2.2018 and 3.3.2018, whereby 3 rd respondent was directed to

remove the unauthorised construction allegedly carried out by her.

2. In fact when the matter came up for admission on 22.6.2018, a

direction was issued by the learned Single Judge to the Secretary of the

Corporation to implement Exhibits P3 and P4 notices against the 3 rd

respondent, if the same is not cancelled or modified in any manner.

3. Today when the matter is taken up, learned counsel appearing for

the 3rd respondent submitted that challenging Exhibits P3 and P4 notices, and

subsequent order dated 2.4.2019 bearing No.KRP-3414/17 (C), 3 rd respondent

preferred Appeal No.328/2019 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government

Institutions, which is pending consideration. I am also informed that the

proceedings are stayed by the Tribunal.

4. In that view of the matter, I do no think anything survives to be

considered in this writ petition in view of the subsequent developments.

Therefore after having heard learned counsel for petitioner

Sri.K.Madhusoodanan, learned Standing Counsel Sri.R.Harikrishnan for the

Corporation of Cochin and learned counsel Sri.Jithin Paul Varghese appearing

for the 3rd respondent, this writ petition is dismissed, leaving open the liberty

of the petitioner to approach the Tribunal, if situation warrants and he is

advised so and to participate in the appeal pending before the Tribunal.

Sd/-

                                                  SHAJI P.CHALY

smv                                                    JUDGE





                            APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1895/1991 OF ERNAKULAM SRO

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 28.10.2017 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT