IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH DECEMBER 2008 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 30711 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- H.KRISHNAN AGED 44, S/O.(LATE) B. HARIDASAN, T.C.26/2127, TUTORS LANE, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CITY CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANHTHAPURAM EPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. REVENUE OFFICER, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, CORPORATION'S BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. M.MANOHAR, T.C.26/2127 (3) TUTORS LANE, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) FOR R1 & R2 SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR FOR R1 & R2 SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.30711 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 5th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner constructed a three storied building with 6 apartments in 8.5. cents of property in Vanchiyoor Village. Retaining one apartment, the petitioner sold the other apartments. In respect of the apartment retained by the petitioner, the property tax was assessed in the name of the petitioner and building number was also assigned as a residential building. Subsequently, the petitioner wanted to start an office for tourism promotion through internet in that apartment. Therefore, he submitted an application for changing the assessment to commercial category. While that petition was pending, allegedly at the instance of the 3rd respondent, Ext.P3 notice was issued by the Revenue Officer, whereby the building number alloted to the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner filed Ext.P4 appeal against that order before the Council along with Ext.P5 petition for stay on several grounds including the ground that the 2nd respondent has no power to issue Exts.P1 and P3. In the meanwhile, the 2nd respondent is taking hasty steps to seal the apartment of the petitioner, is the grievance of the w.p.c.30711/08 2 petitioner in this writ petition. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: “A. That all records relating to Exhibits P1 and P3 be called to this Hon'ble Court and a writ of certiorari or other order passed quashing Exhibit P3: B. That a writ of mandamus or other order be passed directing respondents 1 and 2 not to seal or close down the building detailed in Exhibit P3 order on the basis of Exhibit P3 order; C. That a writ of mandamus or other order be passed directing the 1st respondent to consider Exhibits P4 and P5 and stay all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P3, pending disposal of Exhibits P4 and P5.” 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that Ext.P4 appeal filed by the petitioner can be disposed of expeditiously. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The 1st respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed on Ext.P4, status quo order passed on 17.10.2008 and extended by order dated 3.11.2008 shall continue to be in force. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.30711/08 3