IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933 WA.No. 158 OF 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.17765/2005 Dated 30/11/2007 APPELLANTS: RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 1. M.L.NAZAR, KAVITHA AUTOMOBILES, CANARA STREET, PALAKKAD. 2. M.L.SALEEM, NEW KAVITHA AUTOMOBILES, COIMBATORE ROAD, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 1. K.R.SOMASUNDARESWARAN, RESIDING AT KAMALA NIVAS, 35/475, MAIN ROAD, OLAVAKODE, PALAKKAD-2. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT(M)DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, GOVT. OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PALAKKAD. 5. THE SECRETARY, PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. MEERA. R5 BY ADVS. M/S..V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE, T.C.SURESH MENON, .JIBU P THOMAS & SRI.P.S.APPU. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A. 158/2008 APPENDIX ANNEXURE-1 PLAN ANNEXED TO THE ASSIGNMENT DEED BEARING NO. 5594/2011 DATED 25.7.2011. // TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. KNC/- C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. NO. 158 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 3rd DAY OF OCTOBER, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. The writ appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge vacating the Government order holding that the building constructed by the appellant is not in violation of the Building rules. In fact, the Government order under challenge issued in a proceeding, was vacated by the learned Single Judge. Counsel for the appellants submitted before us that even if the learned Single Judge's judgment is upheld, by virtue of acquisition of land around the building by the appellant later, there may not be any building rule violation warranting demolition of the building. The enforcement of the building rule is essentially with the Municipal authorities. In view of the contention now raised by the appellant about the acquisition of the land with reference to which the compliance of building rule in regard to the construction is to be considered, we feel the appellant can be given an opportunity to present the plan afresh before the Municipal authorities for considering whether the construction is in accordance with W.A. 158/2008 2 the building rules and if so, for approval or otherwise to pass appropriate orders for modification by directing partial demolition. 2. Accordingly, we allow the writ appeal to be withdrawn with direction to the Municipality to consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders. Ext.P11 order issued by the Government will stand modified by fresh orders to be issued by the Municipality. The appellant will file an application within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and there will be a direction to the Municipality to conduct inspection and decide the matter after calling for the appellant's explanation, within six weeks thereafter. Government order will remain stayed for two months from now and thereafter enforcement will be based on orders of the Municipality. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE) KNC/-