IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29706 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VISWALEKSHMYAMMA.B, W/O.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.P., LEKSHMI VILAS, T.C.40/700, SOUTH FORT, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.KKM.SHERIF SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (THURAVOOR) SRI.P.A.ABISH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE TOWN PLANNIG OFFICER, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. SYRIL.Y., MINI NIVAS, CHAKKOTTUKONAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. MINI, W/O.SYRIL.Y., MINI NIVAS, CHAKKOTTUKONAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR R4, R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.29706 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT 1.Notice to respondents 6 and 7 dispensed with, preserving their right for re-hearing of the matter, if aggrieved. Senior counsel appears for respondents 1 to 3 and learned Government Pleader appears for respondents 4 and 5. 2.A provisional order for demolition of building was passed against respondents 6 and 7. Inaction in following that, led to Ext.P4 judgment being issued on 7.7.2008. On 23.10.2008, this Court recorded that final order has been issued. Thus, contempt case against the official respondents was closed as per Ext.P5 judgment. With the passage of time, the petitioner says that the final order has also not been enforced by now. The final order has been issued after conclusion of proceedings. There is no reason why that is kept away from being enforced, unless there are interdicting orders issued by WPC.29706/09 2 superior authorities, including the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. Therefore, respondents 1 to 3 cannot fight shy to enforce its own orders. In the result, this writ petition is ordered directing that unless the final order passed by the Corporation and referred to in Ext.P5 judgment has been interdicted by any other competent authority, the same shall be enforced in accordance with law, at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The second respondent will ensure that this order is enforced as stated above. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.17/11.