Padmini R. v. The Varkala Municipality

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/29TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 10563 of 2012 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------- PADMINI R., WIDOW OF RAMESH, RESIDING AT T.C.XLII/829, KAPPIL MANDIRAM, VALLAKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 008.

BY ADV. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON.

RESPONDENT(S):

-------------

1. THE VARKALA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VARKALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 141.

2. RAJEEV, RESIDING AT THEKKUVILA VEEDU, CANAL PURAMBOKE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 006.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rvs.

WP(C).No. 10563 of 2012 (U) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

------------------------ EXT. P1:

COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 12/12/2011.

EXT. P2:

COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER ISSUED BY THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK DATED 20/01/2012.

EXT. P3:

COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 26/01/2012.

EXT. P4:

COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 10/02/2012.

EXT. P5:

COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE STRUCTURE PUT UP BY THE PETITIONER DATED NIL.

EXT. P6:

COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED NIL.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

------------------------ NIL.

/TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE RVS.

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10563 of 2012 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that at the behest of the 2nd respondent, who, according to the petitioner, is a political rival, the respondent municipality has issued a stop memo calling upon the petitioner to stop construction, which has been carried out by the petitioner in accordance with the approved building permit and plan. 2.

This Court, by interim order dated 27.07.2012, permitted the petitioner to proceed with the construction of the building, which was stopped as per Ext.P3. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the light of the interim order, the construction has been completed; and therefore, no further orders are required.

Recording the said submission, the writ petition is closed.

Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-