IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1280 of 2011(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ T.E.RAVINDRAN, THAREPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.J.ANTONY ROAD, PADIVATTOM, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI SRI.P.V.LONACHAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM.PIN- 682 011 BY ADV. SRI. S. RAMESH BABU, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 1280 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is the absolute owner in possession of 17 cents of land comprised in Survey No. 137/15 A of Edappally South Village, applied and obtained Ext.P3 building permit for effecting construction of building thereon. Ext.P2 is the approved plan. This writ petition has bee filed on being aggrieved by the directions issued by the respondent to stop further construction of the building. Earlier, petitioner was served with Ext.P5 notice under Section 406(1) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. Subsequently, Ext.P6 order was issued. Ext.P6 is a provisional order issued under Section 406(1) of the said Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that in the light of Ext.P6 the petitioner is not in a position to go on with the construction. It is submitted that the petitioner had been effecting construction strictly in terms of Exts.P2 and P3. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that there will not be any impediment for the wpc no.1280/2011 2 petitioner to continue with the construction in terms of Exts.P2 and P3. According to the learned counsel, what is objected and sought to be interdicted is only the construction in violation of Exts.P2 and P3. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of making it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to effect further construction strictly in terms of Exts.P2 and P3. Ultimately, if any violation of Exts. P2 and P3 is found, it will be open to the respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P. A to Judge