Ayyankali Road Residence ... vs District Collector, Ernakulam
2022 Latest Caselaw 7701 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
         TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 25757 OF 2015
PETITIONER/S:

            AYYANKALI ROAD RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION
            REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT, P.K.CHOTHY,
            PANACHIRA,AYYANKALI ROAD, POONITHURA P.O, COCHIN -682
            038.

            BY ADV SRI.BINDU SREEKUMAR



RESPONDENT/S:

     1      DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM

     2      THE SECRETARYTOWN PLANNING OFFICER
            ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, EAST ZONAL
            OFFICE,CORPORATION OF COCHIN, VYTTILA, COCHIN.

     3      SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
            MARADU.

     4      RELIANCE JIO INFOCOM
            CHANDRIKA CHAMBERS, S.A.ROAD, VYTTILA.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
            SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
            SRI.P.GOPINATH
            SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
            SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
            SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
            SRI.K.ANAND, SC, COCHIN CORPN.




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 25757 OF 2015
                                       2

                                   JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:

a. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction calling for the records leading to Exhibit P2 and to quash the same.

b. To declare that the 1st respondent is bound to follow the guide lines dated 13.5.2014, in the interest of justice. c. To declare that Ext.P2 is arbitrary, ultravires, unconstitutional and violation of natural justice.

During the pendency of this writ petition, an affidavit dated 2.3.2020

has been filed on behalf the 4th respondent. Since it is stated by the 4th

respondent that the Company has no intention to proceed with the

construction of the disputed telecommunication tower, which is the subject

matter of Ext.P2, the prayers made in the writ petition has become

infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

sab                                    MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

                                                         JUDGE
 WP(C) NO. 25757 OF 2015


                  APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25757/2015

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 30.5.15

P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.5.2015 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.