Jacob Thomas vs The Adoor Municipality
2022 Latest Caselaw 8284 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 21569 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

           JACOB THOMAS
           AGED 63 YEARS
           S/O LATE P.O. THOMAS, PADINJARE VEEDU, MANAKALA P.O.,
           KARUVATTA, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-691551
           BY ADV JITHIN BABU A


RESPONDENT/S:

    1      THE ADOOR MUNICIPALITY, ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA
           DISTRICT 689503, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
    2      THE SECRETARY,
           ADOOR MUNICIPALITY, ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA
           DISTRICT-689503


    3      THE STANDING COMMITTEE (FINANCE) OF ADOOR MUNICIPAL
           COUNCIL,ADOOR MUNICIPALITY, ADOOR P.O.,
           PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689503
    4      CHAIRMAN,
           MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ADOOR MUNICIPALITY, ADOOR P.O.,
           PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689503
           SRI. K. SHAJ (SC)



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21569 OF 2022               2



                                   JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court, being aggrieved by

the fact that while Ext.P4 appeal and Ext.P6 application for stay

are pending before respondent Nos.3 and 4 respectively,

coercive steps has been taken to recover the amount demanded

in Ext.P3 notice.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

demand in Ext.P3 illegal and unsustainable and any steps to

recover the same pending disposal of the appeal will cause great

prejudice to the petitioner.

3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

respondent Municipality submits that the municipality has no

objection in a direction being issued to the 4 th respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 application for stay. It is also

submitted that the recovery of amounts under Ext.P3 can be kept

in abeyance till a decision is taken by the Chairman on Ext.P6.

4. Having regard to the afore submissions, this writ

petition will stand disposed of, directing the 4 th respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 application for stay preferred

by the petitioner under Section 509 (3) of the Kerala

Municipality Act, as expeditiously as possible, after affording an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such time orders

are passed on Ext.P6, any demand pursuant to Ext.P3 shall be

kept in abeyance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ajt

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21569/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED BUILDING PERMIT NO.BA-385/08-09 DATED 07.06.2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE 17/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.R1-2887/22 DATED 14/06/2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21/06/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3 RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO. 5977 DATED 21/06/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1 RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION DATED 21/06/2022 UNDER SECTION 509(3) OF THE KERALA MUNICIPALITY ACT, 1994 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4" RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO. 5979 DATED 21/06/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER