IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 12109 of 2011(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- DARIUS MARSHALL, S/O. LATE PHIROZE J.MARSHALL, AGED 76 YEARS, 37, JAYANTHI NAGAR COLONY, MOONALINGAL, KOZHIKODE-673 032. BY ADV. SRI.SHYAM PADMAN, SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN, SRI.S.K.SAJU, SMT.M.LISHA. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE CORPORATION OF KOZHIKODE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, BEACH ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 032. BY ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU, SC, KOZHIKODE CORPORATION. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 12109 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 30/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29/12/2010 ISSUED BY SMT.SAINABI TO THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03/01/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGULARISATION. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 11/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.12109 of 2011 ---------------------------- Dated 21st June, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner in possession of 16.40 cents of property comprised in Re-survey No.4-1-38 of Kasaba Village. This writ petition has been filed mainly challenging Ext.P3 order whereby alleging that the petitioner has effected unauthorized construction thereon he was required to demolish such unauthorized construction. In fact, Ext.P3 is an order issued under section 406(1) of the Kerala Municipality Act. On its receipt, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 representation. The petitioner has also submitted Ext.P6 application for regularization of the said construction in terms of Rule 143 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules (for short `the Rules'). The very action on the part of the petitioner in submitting an application for regularization under Rule 143 of the Rules itself would reveal that he himself admits the fact that the construction effected by him is unauthorized. But, the contention of the petitioner is that, it is a construction unauthorizedly effected but, the same falls within the purview of Rule 143 of the Rules so that it could be regularized. It is in the said circumstances that Ext.P6 application has been WP(C).No.12109/2011 2 submitted. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending consideration of Ext.P6 application the respondent is taking steps to finalise the proceedings initiated as per Ext.P3 in terms of section 406(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act. The respondent has filed a statement in this writ petition virtually, reiterating the stand taken by them in the impugned order. However, it is a fact that subsequent to the receipt of Ext.P3 order the petitioner has submitted Ext.P6 application for regularization. I do not think that this Court should consider the merits of the rival contentions at this stage. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider Ext.P6 application, in case it is received and pending, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till a decision is taken on Ext.P6, the respondent shall keep in abeyance all coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P3. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS