IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2008 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1930 W.P(C).No. 37067 of 2007(K) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------- AMMINI JAMES, W/O.JAMES, AGED 55 YEARS, PALAKKAPPILLIL HOUSE, KOCHI-15. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUKUMARA MENON RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, KOCHI-11. 2. ANTONY ALIAS ANTI, S/O.NADUMPARAMBIL VAREETH, RESIDING AT KOCHANATTUPARAMBU, KOCHI-15. BY ADV. SMT.A.G.ANEETHA FOR R1 SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ FOR R2 SMT.N.K.MAYA FOR R2 SRI. S. RAMESH BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 37067 OF 2007 K ==================== Dated this the 9th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner seeks implementation of Ext.P1, an order dated 16/6/98 issued by the 1st respondent directing inter alia that the unauthorised construction mentioned therein should be demolished. It is also stated by the petitioner that Ext.P1 order was confirmed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in Ext.P5 order passed by it in Appeal No.491/06. According to the petitioner, despite all this, the 1st respondent is not implementing Ext.P1 and that led the Petitioner to file this writ petition. 2. A statement has been filed by the 1st respondent. The only justification that is offered for non implementation of Ext.P1 is that by Ext.R1(a) order, Ext.P1 has been stayed by the Government. 3. Though this contention has been raised by the 1st respondent, what is seen is that while Ext.P1 order, the implementation of which is sought in this writ petition, was issued on 16/6/98, the appellate order Ext.R1(a) relied on by the 1st respondent is dated 19/5/98. It does not need much elaboration to conclude that by Ext.R1(a) of an earlier date, the WPC 37067/07 :2 : operation of Ext.P1 could not have been stayed. Therefore, I reject the contention of the 1st respondent that Ext.P1 has been stayed by Ext.R1(a). In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 1st respondent shall implement Ext.P1 on the production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Rp