Soja Subramanian vs District Collector
2024 Latest Caselaw 33028 Ker

Kerala High Court

Soja Subramanian vs District Collector on 14 November, 2024

                                                    2024:KER:85395
                                 1
WP(C)No. 4367 of 2020

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 23RD KARTHIKA,

                                1946

                    WP(C) NO. 4367 OF 2020

PETITIONER:

            SOJA SUBRAMANIAN, AGED 26 YEARS
            D/O.SUBRAMANIAN, AMMAKKAD VEEDU, NAYARAMBALAM,
            NEDUNGADU, ERNAKULAM-682 503.

            BY ADV H.SUNIL


RESPONDENTS:

   1        DISTRICT COLLECTOR
            CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM-682 030.

   2        SUB COLLECTOR, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT
            KOCHI, ERNAKULAM-682 001.

   3        STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NJARAKKAL POLICE
            STATION,
            ERNAKULAM-682 503.

   4        SECRETARY, NAYARAMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
            NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM-682 503.

   5        K.K.RAJU, S/O.KUMARAN, KATTIL VEEDU, NEDUNGADU
            NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM-682 50.

           BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
           R1 TO 3 - SRI.RAJEEV JYOTHISH
           GEORGE,GOVERNMENT PLEADER
       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING             COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION    ON   14.11.2024,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                      2024:KER:85395
                                   2
WP(C)No. 4367 of 2020

                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of November, 2024

The writ petition is preferred alleging the illegal

attempt of the 5th respondent to construct a temple and

conduct religious activities near to the petitioner's boundary

wall.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1 st

respondent admitting the facts stated by the petitioner. It is

also stated in the counter affidavit that all the remedial

measures have been taken by the 1st respondent.

3. Under such circumstances, the learned counsel

for the petitioner seeks for a direction to the 4 th respondent

to implement Ext.P1 order.

4. Since the averments in the writ petition is not

controverted, I deem it appropriate to allow this writ

petition.

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed.

sd/-

P.M.MANOJ JUDGE das 2024:KER:85395

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4367/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16.10.2017.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY COMPLAINT BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED NIL.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY COMPLAINT BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30.01.2020.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY COMPLAINT BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30.01.2020.