IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 575 of 2009(R) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- RAJALAKSHMI, D/O.PRASANNAKUMARI RESIDING AT T.C. NO. 6/554 VETTATHIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PEEDIKATTU MURI CHERUVAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR SRI.S.JAYAPRAKASH (MADAVOOR) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY SRI. N. NANDA KUMARA MENON (SR.) SRI. P.K. MANOJ KUMAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 575 of 2009(R) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF TAX FOR THE YEAR 2006-2007. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT FOR THE PAYMENT OF LICENCE FEE FOR THE YEAR 2005. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF PROFESSIONAL TAX FOR THE YEAR 2007-08. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATTED 11.6.2008 PASSED BY RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 24.6.2008 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 27.6.2008 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN. EXT.P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.12.2008 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S.SIRI JAGAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C)No. 575 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T Certain constructions made by the petitioner in her property was directed to be demolished as per Ext.P8 order of the 1st respondent Corporation. When Ext.P4 show cause notice which culminated in Ext.P8 was issued to the petitioner, the petitioner filed Ext.P5 reply and Ext.P6 application seeking regularisation of the construction. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that without passing orders on Ext.P6 application for regularisation, the 1st respondent is taking steps to implement Ext.P8 order of demolition. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued commanding the respondent to grant permission by regularizing the alteration in accordance with Exhibit-P7 plan and Exhibit-P6 application within a time limit to be prescribed by this court. ii) To call for the records leading to Exhibit-P8 quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari finding that it is passed violating the statutory provisions.” 2. I have heard the senior counsel appearing for the respondent also. 3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the Corporation W.P(C)No. 575 of 2009 - 2 - supports Ext.P8 order. However, I am of opinion that having received Ext.P6 application for regularisation of the construction, the Corporation has a duty to dispose of the same expeditiously before resorting to demolition. 4. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 application for regularisation of the construction made by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed on Ext.P6 application submitted by the petitioner status quo as on today shall be maintained. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs