IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18871 of 2008(V)
1. P.K.SREEJA RAJAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.RAJAGOPAL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :24/06/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P. (C) No. 18871 OF 2008 - V
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 24th June 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner complains that a commercial complex constructed
on the side of the Highway is exposed to threat of demolition. It is
stated that the building is a two storied one and has been in
existence for the last more than 10 years. According to the
petitioner, the 3rd respondent has now issued Ext. P9 notice
alleging that the construction of the building is in violation of the
Coastal Regulation Zone Notification of 1991 and on that basis the
building is threatened to be demolished. It is challenging Ext. P9
notice this writ petition is filed.
2. A reading of Ext. P9 shows that on the allegation that the
building has been constructed in violation of the C.R.Z. Notification
the petitioner has been called upon to show cause why steps shall
not be taken against him. It is stated that if satisfactory reply is not
received within the time specified further action will be continued.
W.P.(C) No.18871 OF 2008
– 2 –
On receipt pf Ext. P9, petitioner has filed his reply Ext. P10 and
nothing is stated as to whether the 3rd respondent has taken any
final decision in this matter. Therefore, Ext. P9 being only a show
cause notice, I see no justification to entertain the writ petition.
3. Since the petitioner has already shown cause in response
to Ext. P9 by filing Ext. P10 reply it is for the 3rd respondent to take
decision on Ext. P10. If such decision is adverse to the petitioner, it
is also open to the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy.
Therefore leaving it open to the petitioner to await final order
on Ext.P9 and thereafter to pursue his statutory remedy if final
decision communicated on Ext.P10 is adverse to him, this writ
petition is disposed of.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-