IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2011 / 21ST SRAVANA 1933 WA.No. 1118 of 2011() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.35279/2010 Dated 20/11/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS ------------------------------- 1. SURYA GARDEN'S RESIDENTS' ASSOCIATION (SGRA) A REGISTERED SOCIETY NO.252/1995,REGISTERED UNDER TRAVANCORE COCHIN CHARITABLE SOCIETIES ACT, 1995,REGD.OFFICE AT 'SUPRABHA',SURYA GARDENS, SASTHAMANGALAM,TRIVANDRUM,REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT, T.SUKUMARAN NAIR, S/O.LATE THANUPILLAI, AGED 78 2. A.M.PANICKER, S/O.K.S.ACHUTHAN PILLAI, AGED 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.27, SGRA, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SMT.A.V.PRIYA SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SMT.KVP.JAYALEKSHMY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION PROJECT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-596001. 6. THE CITY CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM, CORPORATION BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM-695033. 7. HEERA CONSTRUCTIONS CORPORATION (P)LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HEERA PARK, M.P.APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014. R1 TO R5 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R6 SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR FOR R6 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. CHELAMESWAR, C.J & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1118 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. This appeal arises from an interim order dated 20.12.2010 whereby the earlier order dated 25.11.2010 granting interim stay was vacated after taking note of the facts and circumstances put forward by the parties. 2. The sequence of events is as follows: The appellant Association had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P(C). No.14509 of 2005 challenging the illegal construction being effected by the concerned respondent, allegedly in violation of the Zoning Regulation and the exemption granted by the Government as per Exhibit P8 order dated 16.8.2004. When the matter came up for consideration before the Court on 9.3.2006, an interim order passed, as borne by Exhibit R7(b1), to the effect that all constructions will be 'subject to the result' of the Writ Petition. There was6 no challenge on the part of the appellant against that order. The matter remained as it was for nearly one year. Thereafter, when the said Writ Petition came up for final WA.1118/11 2 hearing on 10.11.2006, the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner submitted that the writ petitioner would like to have the remedy pursued before the Government. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was disposed of as per Exhibit R7(b2) judgment granting liberty to approach the Government by filing a representation. 3. It is brought on record that, Exhibit P9 representation dated 7.11.2006 was pursued further and a hearing was conducted by the Government. The appellant waited for nearly 2 ½ years and filed the Writ Petition challenging the exemption granted as per Exhibit P8 and the construction being effected by the concerned respondent in violation of the Zoning Regulations. It is true that an interim order of stay was granted on 25.11.2010, but on completion of service of notice, the matter was considered again by the learned Single Judge on 20.12.2010, when it was observed that the action/inaction on the part of the writ petitioner could not but be deprecated in view of the materials brought on record. It was in the said circumstances, that the interim order granted earlier was vacated making it clear that the construction, if any, made by the 7th respondent would be subject to the WA.1118/11 3 outcome of the Writ Petition. The appellants seek to challenge the said order. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellants at length, this Court finds that the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 20.12.2010 was in effect, the same similar order as passed earlier on 9.3.2006 by way of Exhibit R7(b1), when the appellant Association approached this Court by filing W.P(C). No.14509 of 2005. Obviously, there was no challenge against such an order in the earlier round of litigation. As it stands so, the appellant cannot be stated as aggrieved, by the similar order as now passed by the learned Single Judge. In the above circumstances, we find that the appeal is devoid of any merit and the same is dismissed in limine. J.CHELAMESWAR, CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE vgs