IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2008 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6364 of 2008(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.M.SHAJU, SECRETARY, VADOOKKARA MADYASHAPP VIRUDHA SAMITHI, P.O.VADOOKKARA, THRISSUR 682 002. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THRISSUR CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, THRISSUR. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ZONAL OFFICE, KOORKKANCHERI, THRISSUR CORPORATION. 3. ANTHONY, KANJIRATHINKAL VEEDU, VADOOKKARA, THRISSUR 680007. 4. SAJIMON SEBASTIAN, LICENCEE, T.S.NO.2, VADOOKKARA, THRISSUR 682 007 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUPUZHA, THRISSUR. *6. THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (*IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL R6 AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 11/03/2008 IN THE WRIT PETITION) BY ADV. SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATIO SRI.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL SRI.M.R.DHANIL SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SMT.RAMANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 6364 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T The Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions is impleaded suo motu as additional 6th respondent in the writ petition. The Registry will carry out corrections in the cause title. 2. This writ petition has been filed seeking implementation of Ext.P2 order of demolition passed by the Corporation of Thrissur against respondetns 3 & 4. Learned standing counsel for the Corporation as well as the learned counsel for respondents 3 & 4 sought time to file counter affidavit. It is submitted at the Bar that against Ext.P2, respondents 3 & 4 have preferred appeal to the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. But Shri.S.Mohammed Al Rafi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though they applied for stay of Ext.P2, the Tribunal was not inclined to grant the same. Since the Tribunal declined the stay, the Corporation is bound to implement Ext.P2. Technically, what the learned counsel for the petitioner submits may be correct but I feel that since the Tribunal has not decided the statutory appeal finally, the Corporation is justified in waiting till the disposal of the appeal. Under these circumstances, I dispose of the writ WP(C) No. 6364/2008 -2- petition itself directing the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram to hear and dispose of the appeal preferred by respondents 3 & 4 against Ext.P2 order of the Corporation at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of three months of receiving a copy of this judgment. If the Tribunal also confirms Ext.P2, the 1st respondent will not hesitate to implement Ext.P2. If necessary, the assistance of the 5th respondent will be sought for and the 5th respondent will render assistance if the Corporation seeks such assistance. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) jg