IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 37992 of 2010(Y) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- CHACKO,S/O.ULAHANNAN,POTTACKAL HOUSE, EAST MARADY PO,MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE OFFICE, KAKKANADU,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.682 030. 2. MARADY GRAMA PANCHAYAT,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.682 014. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.682 014. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.682 014. R1 & R3 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 37992 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 21st day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P9 notice. 2. According to the petitioner, in respect of his son's property covered by Ext.P1, after obtaining a building permit, when construction was commenced, Ext.P9 notice has been issued by the 1st respondent invoking his powers under Act 28 of 2008, which inter alia orders demolition of the work already done and requiring the petitioner to restore the land into its old position. Although proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner, as at present, such proceedings under Act 28 of 2008 have not been completed by the 1st respondent. 3. Therefore, at this stage, what is required is that the 1st respondent should complete the proceedings after hearing the petitioner. Necessarily therefore, till such orders are passed, the directions in Ext.P9 notice requiring the second respondent to demolish the existing structures and requiring the petitioner's son to restore the land in its old position cannot be implemented. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the WPC No. 37992/10 :2 : 1st respondent to complete the proceedings under Act 28 of 2008 with notice either to the petitioner or his son. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible and until then, directions 2 and 3 in Ext.P9 shall not be implemented. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp