State Of Kerala vs Muralikumar
2024 Latest Caselaw 30405 Ker

Kerala High Court

State Of Kerala vs Muralikumar on 25 October, 2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
                                     &
                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
          Friday, the 25th day of October 2024 / 3rd Karthika, 1946
                             WA NO. 1751 OF 2016
   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.10.2015 IN WPC 17004/2006 OF THIS COURT
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:

  1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,
     GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01.

AND 3 OTHERS.

BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.TEKCHAND

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

     MURALIKUMAR, S/O.MADHAVAN, "PRITHVI" KATTUCHANDA, POYIKAMUKKU,
     CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV.SRI.P.SUJITH KUMAR

     Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the
circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum, the High Court be pleased
to stay the operation and implementation of the judgment dated 07.10.2015
in W.P.(C)No.17004/2006 of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, pending
disposal of the above Writ Appeal.
     This Writ appeal again coming on for orders on 25.10.2024, upon
perusing the appeal memorandum , and this court's order dated 08.10.2024,
the court on the same day passed the following:
                               NITIN JAMDAR, C.J.
                                          &
                                    S.MANU, J.
                        =========================
                              W.A. No. 1751 of 2016
                        =========================
                      Dated this the 25th day of October, 2024

                                         ORDER

NITIN JAMDAR, C.J.

Heard Sri.V. Tekchand, learned Senior Government Pleader. None appears for the Respondent again.

2. On 8 October 2024, we noted that if none appears for the Respondent, Court will consider the arguments of the Appellants and the prayer for an interim order.

3. The learned Senior Government Pleader contends that the reliance was placed in the impugned judgment on an order passed in appeal by the adjacent property owners, however, in that case, the Government had taken a lenient view since the appellant therein had expired. Having heard the learned Senior Government Pleader, we find that arguable questions are raised.

4. Appeal is admitted. During the pendency of the Appeal, the implementation of the impugned judgment and order shall stand stayed.

Sd/-

NITIN JAMDAR CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

S.MANU JUDGE rp

25-10-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar