High Court of KeralaWP(C)/13505/2015disposed of

C.Jagadamma v. Cherthala Municipality

2015-05-08Honourable Mr. Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MAY 2015/18TH VAISAKHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 13505 of 2015 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------- C.JAGADAMMA, AJITH BHAVAN, WARD NO XI, CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN SRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN SMT.S.LEENA SRI.K.S.PRENJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESNTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHERTHALA P.O, CHERTHALA, PIN-688 524.

2. THE SECRETARY, CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY, CHERTHALA P.O, CHERTHALA, PIN-688 524.

3. P.N. VIKRAMA PANICKER, AMBADI, KADAKKARAPALLI P.O, CHERTHALA, PIN-688 529.

BY ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

mbr/

WP(C).No. 13505 of 2015 (K) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1:

THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION DATED 24.3.1999 TAKEN AND COUNTER SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBTIP2:

THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.11.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3:

THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.4.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4:

THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF EXT.P3.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

- NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C).No.13505/2015 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 8th Day of May, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner approached the second respondent by Ext.P3 complaining about illegal construction activities by the third respondent. It is also complained that by such construction, petitioner's right to light, air and privacy will also be lost. 2.

In view of the pendency of Ext.P3, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider Ext.P3 after hearing the petitioner or her representative and the third respondent within a period of one month and take appropriate decision thereon. If it is found that the construction is being undertaken in violation of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, necessary action will be taken to stop that activity without any delay. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ms