IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9635 of 2009(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHEEJA HARSHAKUMAR, T.C.NO.1/1782 (3), NAVARAGAM LANE, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRIVANDRUM-11. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, CORPORATION BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. 3. TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM, CORPORATION BUILDING, TRIVANDRUM. 4. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI. P.K. MANOJ KUMAR GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 9635 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 25th March, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner constructed a three storeyed building, which, according to the petitioner, was in accordance with the permit issued in respect of which there was also an order granting regularisation. But, the Corporation issued a stop memo interdicting the petitioner from continuing the construction. The petitioner challenged the same before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in which by Ext. P11, the Tribunal set aside the stop memo on the ground that the procedure contemplated under Section 406 has not been complied with and directed fresh proper proceedings under Section 406 of the Kerala Municipality Act without delay, if there are reasons for doing so. The contention of the petitioner is that the Corporation cannot now initiate proceedings under Section 406 in so far as the Corporation itself had regularised the construction by Ext. P5 order. 2. I am of opinion that these are all matters which the petitioner has to take up with the Corporation if and when they initiate fresh proceedings as permitted in Ext. P11 order of the Tribunal. In the above circumstances, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the Corporation, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the 1st respondent intends to take any further proceedings as permitted by Ext. P11 order, the same shall be initiated and completed within one month from today. The same shall be only after W.P.C. No. 9635/09. -: 2 :- an opportunity to the petitioner to file objections to a preliminary order to be issued and passing a final order, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.