IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18646 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VINOD KUMAR.K.S., KADAKAMNA PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, ATHIYANNOOR, ARALUMMOODU. BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, NEYYATTINKARA MUNCIPALITY NEYYATTINKARA P.O. 2. THE CHAIR PERSON REPRESENTING THE NEYYATTINKARA MUNCIPALITY COUNCIL NEYYATTINKARA MUNCIPALITY, NEYYATTINKARA P.O. 3. SHYLAJA, NAKKOD PUTHEN VEEDU, PERUMPATHUTHOOR P.O. NEYYATTINKARA . BY SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S. SUDHEER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.18646/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that there is an agreement between the Municipality and the 3rd respondent leasing out a building belonging to the 3rd respondent. According to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent has unauthorisedly enclosed a portion of the Muncipal building and demolishing a wall, put rolling shutters. It is stated that rejecting his objection, the Muncipality has ordered its removal by Ext.P9. He has complain that the 3rd respondent has subleased the said building and that the sub lease has been confirmed in the enquiry conducted by the Revenue Inspector and Exts.P11 and P12 reports are referred to in this context. 2. Petitioner submits that, despite all the aforesaid action and the fact that there are several applicants 2 interested in taking the room on lease, the Muncipality is taking steps for renewing the lease in favour of the 3rd respondent. 3. The case was adjourned with a direction to the Standing Counsel to get instructions in this matter. The Standing Counsel, today, on instructions submits that, at present absolutely there is no proposal for renewal of the lease in favour of the 3rd respondent. This submission is recorded and the writ petition is closed reserving the liberty to the petitioner to move this court if and when any irregularity in this respect is committed by the Municipality. In so far as the complaint of the petitioner regarding the non-implementation of Ext.P9 order is concerned, I direct that the petitioner may make a representation in this behalf to the Ist respondent and on receipt thereof appropriate action shall be taken. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 3