The Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority v. The Maradu Municipality
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/20TH KARTHIKA, 1937 RP.No. 787 of 2015 IN WA.132/2013 ------------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 132/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 02-06-2015 REVIEW PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT:
-------------------------------------------------------- THE KERALA STATE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, SASTRA BHAVAN PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 682304.
BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL, KERALA COASTAL ZONE MANAG RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
-----------------------------------------
1. THE MARADU MUNICIPALITY MARADU P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY KOCHI-682 304.
2. THE SECRETARY MARADU MUNICIPALITY, MARADU P.O., KOCHI-682 304.
3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (RB) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
4. ALFA AVENTURES PVT.LTD.
ALFA TOWERS, I.S.PRESS ROAD REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR J.PAUL RAJ KOCHI-682 018.
R4 BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.FAZIL R BY SRI.T.R.RAJAN, SC THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-11-2015, ALONG WITH RP. 912/2015, RP. 913/2015, RP. 914/2015, RP. 915/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P. No.787 of 2015 in W.A.132 of 2013 R.P. No.912 of 2015 in W.A.199 of 2013 R.P. No.913 of 2015 in W.A.150 of 2013 R.P. No.914 of 2015 in W.A.151 of 2013 & R.P. No.915 of 2015 in W.A.148 of 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of November, 2015
ORDER
Antony Dominic, J.
These review petitions are filed by the Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority, essentially seeking review of paragraph 12 of the common judgment rendered by this Court on 2nd June 2015 disposing of the writ appeals. In paragraph 20, after referring to the letter dated, 17.6.2006 issued by the review petitioner, this Court held that the obligation thereunder is on the local authority and that if the local authority has failed in complying with the requirements of the letter, the permit holders cannot be taken to task. The contention raised by the counsel for the review petitioner is that as a result of the misconduct by the local authority, illegal construction was permitted and that, the last sentence of the paragraph should be deleted.
R.P. Nos.787, 912, 913, 914 & 915 of 2015 : 2 :
2. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we find that for the failure of the local authority in complying with the letter, the permit holders cannot be taken to task was a conscious finding entered into by the Court and we do not find any error in that finding justifying the entertainment of the review petitions.
Review petitions are dismissed accordingly.
Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE jes