IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2008 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 9256 of 2008(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A. AHAMED KUNJU, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O/ MYTHEEN KUNJU, VALIYATHU VADAKKATHIL, MEMANA, OACHINRA, P.O. KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.HARISH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, KAYAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, KAYAMKULAM. 2. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, KAYAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, KAYAMKULAM BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18 / 3 / 2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 9256 of 2008 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of March , 2008 JUDGMENT In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs; 1). To call for the records leading to Ext.P3 notice and Ext.P4 order and set aside the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ; 2). To issue a writ of mandamus order or direction commanding the first respondent not to demolish the dress work done by the petitioner in shop No. XXIII/162 A,B,C. 3). To issue a Writ of Mandamus order or direction commanding the first respondent to stay all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P4 order till the final order is passed. 4). To issue a writ of mandamus order or direction commanding the first respondent to consider and dispose of exhibit P6 objection filed by the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that though he had submitted Ext.P6 reply to Ext.P3 show cause notice, (which was WPC No.9256/2008 2 accompanied by Ext.P4 order) and the Municipality invited him for hearing as per Ext.P7 and the Municipality did conduct hearing, till this moment no orders on the basis of the hearing so conducted have been passed by the Municipality and much less communicated to him. According to the petitioner, even as he awaited orders pursuant to the hearing conducted as per Ext.P7, the functionaries of the Municipality along with a Councillor, who is taking undue interest in the matter, came over for demolishing the constructions which are made mention of in Ext.P4. The petitioner asserted that till this moment, the constructions mentioned in Ext.P4 have not been demolished or removed by the Municipality. In view of the above assertion and the further assertion that orders have not been passed pursuant to the hearing conducted as per Ext.P7, I dispose of this Writ Petition itself issuing the following directions; i). The Municipality is directed to pass orders on the basis of the hearing conducted pursuant to Ext.P7 and communicate the orders to the petitioner within seven days from today. ii). Till such time as orders are passed and communicated, the Municipality and the petitioner are directed to maintain WPC No.9256/2008 3 status quo as obtaining today regarding the constructions which are made mention of in Ext.P4. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. dpk