K.U.Krishnakumar vs Maradu Municipality
2021 Latest Caselaw 13596 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
    THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2021 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1943
                   WP(C) NO. 13009 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            K.U.KRISHNAKUMAR,
            AGED 64 YEARS,
            S/O. UNNI, KOLLAT HOUSE,
            TEMPLE ROAD, MARADU P.O.

            BY ADV R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)

RESPONDENTS:

1           MARADU MUNICIPALITY,
            REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
            MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KRL ROAD,
            NEAR KUNDANOOR JUNCTION,
            MADARU, ERNAKULAM - 682 304

2           SECRETARY, MARADU MUNICIPALITY,
            MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KRL ROAD,
            NEAR KUNDANOOR JUNCTION,
            MARADU, ERNAKULAM - 682 304

            SRI. T.R. RAJAN, SC

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP           FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME           DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.13009/2021
                                  :2 :




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 01st day of July, 2021

The petitioner submits that on the Southern side of

the property of the petitioner there is a canal having width of

3.7 metres. The said canal is between the petitioner's

residential property and the Municipal road. The petitioner

proposed to demolish the old residential building and

construct a new one. In order to carry materials from the

road to his house, he has to construct a new ramp having

sufficient width, over the canal.

2. When the petitioner started construction of

ramp/slab adjacent to the existing ramp/slab, Ext.P6 Stop

Memo has been issued by the Secretary to the Municipality.

The petitioner would submit that unless the proposed ramp is

constructed, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and

loss. The petitioner has therefore submitted Ext.P7

application for permission to construct the said ramp. WP(C) No.13009/2021

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality.

4. As the petitioner's property is adjacent to the canal

and for construction of his residential house, proper access is

necessary from the road, it appears that the request made by

the petitioner for construction of the ramp is genuine. But it

is not discernible whether construction of a new ramp will

adversely affect free flow of water.

In the circumstances, without pronouncing

anything on the merits of the request made by the petitioner,

the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2 nd respondent to

consider Ext.P7 application submitted by the petitioner and

take a decision in accordance with law thereon, within a

period of two weeks.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR WP(C) No.13009/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13009/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED WILL NO.177/III/2003 DATED 22-11-2003 OF SRO, MARADU EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 23-11-2020 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MARADU EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE MARADU MUNICIPALITY DATED 23-11-2020 TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH EVIDENCING RAMP/SLAB CONSTRUCTED IN THE AYANI THODU FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE PETITIONER'S HOUSE EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE RAMP/SLAB IN BETWEEN PETITIONER'S PROPERTY AND THE ROAD EXHIBIT P6 A TREU COPY FO THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 14-06-2021 EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17-06-2021 EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18-06-2021