IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 12793 of 2008() ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.V.K.ITTOOP, 779/28, VATTOLI VEEDU, BEHIND CARMEL SCHOOL, IRRIGATION QUARTERS ROAD, CHALAKUDY-680 307. BY ADV. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT: ------------- CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, COCHIN. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI S.RAMESH BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) 12793 of 2008 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated: JUNE 18, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner complains about a shed constructed by the respondent Corporation om a PWD puramboke which is lying close to the petitioner's property. Ext.P3 photograph shows the nature of the construction that has been made. According to the petitioner, the shed has been constructed as a waste dumping yard for dumping waste that is collected from that area and if it is allowed, that will make his life miserable as it is illegal to dump waste in a shed like the one constructed by the Corporation. 2. The learned standing counsel for the Corporation on instructions submits that the area where the shed has been constructed is identified by the Councilor of the Ward concerned and the local people and this was the only available site in the area. It is stated that the proposal is to use the shed as a waste segregation shed and that it will be done by the Kudumbasree Unit. It is stated that the construction has been made with the consent of the PWD and subject to the condition that when the WP(C) 12793/08 2 PWD requires the land for widening the road or other purposes, the shed will be demolished and removed. 3. From the above it is evident that the place where the shed has been constructed has been identified by the Councilor of the Corporation with the involvement of the representatives of the local people and that it is only a temporary arrangement made by the Corporation. At any rate, since the shed is constructed in a PWD land over which the petitioner has no claim, there cannot be any valid objection from the petitioner. In view of this, recording the submission made by the standing counsel for the Corporation, this writ petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE mt/-