High Court Kerala High Court

P.J. Kurian vs Thrikkakara Grama Panchayath on 28 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
P.J. Kurian vs Thrikkakara Grama Panchayath on 28 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 34617 of 2008(U)


1. P.J. KURIAN, AGED 61 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. KURIAKOSE, AGED 54 YEARS,
3. ROSAMMA ABRAHAM, AGED 61 YEARS,
4. AKSHAY SATISH VARMA, AGED 21 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.S.MANU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :28/11/2008

 O R D E R
                            S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                    ==================

                     W.P(C).No.34617 of 2008

                    ==================

           Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are owners of flats in an apartment complex

viz., “White Castle” at Edappally. Their grievance is that the 1st

respondent Panchayat has demolished part of the apartment

complex and is taking further steps to demolish more of the

same. The petitioners submit that this is being done without any

notice or hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners, therefore,

seek the following reliefs:

“i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
or direction directing the respondent No.2 to issue a copy of
order authorizing demolition of any structure in the premises of
the residential apartment White Castle and provide the
petitioners an ample opportunity to hem to show cause against
the order of demolition.

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
or direction directing the respondents to keep in abeyance the
order for demolishing any structure in the premises of the
residential apartment White Caste at Edappally till the
petitioners are herad in the matter.”

2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st

respondent-Panchayat submits that complaints were received to

the effect that the area earmarked for car parking has been used

for construction of flats and therefore, notice was issued to the

w.p.c.34617/08 2

original owner of the apartment complex, who realising that the

construction is unauthorised, demolished the portion himself and

the Panchayat has not demolished any building. The Standing

Counsel further submits that if any demolition is actually

undertaken by the Panchayat, that would only be after issuing

notice to all the affected and hearing them. This is recorded and

the writ petition is closed.

Sd/-

sdk+                                      S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE


             ///True copy///




                            P.A. to Judge

w.p.c.34617/08    3