IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 RP.No. 541 of 2011() ----------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.14983 OF 2011 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT ....... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 3rd RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------------- SHAMMY THILAKAN, S/O.SURENDRANATHA THILAKAN PALAPURAM J.N.R.A. 3, OPPOSITE S.N.VANITHA COLLEGE, KOLLAM 691 004. BY SRI.N.DHARMADAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. N.SHEELA, PULARI, MUNDAKKAL, MANI'S FAMILY MART, OPOSITE S.N.COLLEGE, KOLLAM 691 004. 2. THE KOLLAM CORPORATION, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, KOLLAM 691 001. 3. THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, TRIVANDRUM 695 001. R1 BY SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI , SENIOR ADVOCATE R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHANDAS. R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.L.G.SURESHBABU THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss R.P. NO.541/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A- 1:- COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE PLACE. A- II:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 8.2.2010 ISSUED BY KOLLAM CORPORATION TO IST RESPONDENT. A-III:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 1.7.2010 ISSUED BY CORPORATION TO IST RESPONDENT. A-IV- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT.D 21.7.2010 B IST RESPONDENT. A -V:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 26.11.2010 BY IST RESPONDENT. A -VI:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 5.8.2010 ISSUED BY POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. A -VII:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 10.5.2011 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT SECRETARY. A -VIII:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 23.11.2009 ISSUED BY CORPORATION TO IST RESPONDENT. A-IX:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 15.3.2010 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION TO THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Review Petition No.541 of 2011 in W.P.(C)No.14983 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2011 O R D E R The 3rd respondent in the writ petition is the review petitioner. As per the judgment dated 3.6.2011 in WPC No.14983/2011 this Court directed the first respondent to forward Ext.P3 application submitted by the writ petitioner carrying a request for regularisation of the unauthorised construction and also for granting permission to effect additional construction to the second respondent and the second respondent, in turn, was directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 within the time stipulated thereunder. It was further ordered to keep in abeyance all further proceedings including demolition of the building in question pursuant to Ext.P4 till a decision is taken on Ext.P3 application. Along with the review petition the review petitioner has produced Annexures I to IX to contend that the question of regularisation was earlier considered by the Secretary of the Corporation and it was rejected. In short, the RP No. 541/2011. : 2 : contention is that the review petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for in Ext.P3. Since I have already directed the second respondent to consider Ext.P3 application, I am of the view that in the interest of justice the judgment in WPC No.14983/2011 requires modification so as to make the second respondent to grant an opportunity of being heard to the 3rd respondent as well before taking a decision on Ext.P3, as per the directions in the judgment dated 22.7.2011. Accordingly, the judgment dated 22.7.2011 stands modified to the said extent. It is further made clear that it will be open to the 3rd respondent to raise all his contentions before the second respondent. This review petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge