IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 14654 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. R.V.SHERIFF KHAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, RAYAM MARAKKAR HOUSE, THAIKAD AMSOM & DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. R.V.AARIFF KHAN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, RAYAM MARAKKAR HOUSE, THAIKAD AMSOM & DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA SRI.ANTONY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, THRISSUR REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, THRISSUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS FOR R1 SRI.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 14654 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 26th May, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioners have purchased certain shop rooms from a builder. Now, they are threatened with proceedings for demolition of a portion of the same on the ground that it has been constructed in violation of the building rules. However, no formal orders have been issued to the petitioners yet. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent directing him to issue the provisional and final order as provided in Section 406 of the Municipality Act to the petitioners. b) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent directing him not to interfere with the business of the tenant being conducted by the tenant under Exhibit P1 licence issued by the 1st respondent. c) Direct the 1st respondent not to proceed with coercive steps against the petitioners till the petitioners avail the statutory remedy. d) Declare that 1st respondent is duty bound to pass order and serve copy thereof on the petitioners before taking any coercive steps against the petitioners.” 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the Corporation also. 3. I am of opinion that it is only appropriate that before enforcing demolition of the building, the Corporation shall pass formal orders as provided in the Kerala Municipalities Act. Accordingly, I direct the 1st respondent to see that formal orders as contemplated under the Act are passed as expeditiously as possible. Until after two W.P.C. No. 14654/2008. -: 2 :- weeks of communicating formal orders to the petitioners, status quo as on today shall be maintained. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/