Allowed

P.N.Chandran v. Secretary, Kalamassery, Municipality

Kerala HC7 Nov 2017WP(C)/25282/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition directing the Secretary of Kalamassery Municipality to decide on a petitioner's representation concerning an alleged attempt to shorten road width within one month. Notice was issued to other affected persons.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to take a decision on the petitioner's representation within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

P.N.Chandran Vs Secretary, Kalamassery… — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/16TH KARTHIKA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 25282 of 2017 (I)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

P.N.CHANDRAN., MANAGING PARTNER, SOUTHERN TRANSPORT COMPANY, 7/151, THAIKATTUKARA P.O, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM -683 106.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN SRI.K.NIRMALAN

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

SECRETARY, KALAMASSERY MUNICIPALITY CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR P.O., ERNAKULAM -682 033.

¶11

BY SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER,SC

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

sdr/-

¶14

WP(C).No. 25282 of 2017 (I) ----------------------------

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC NO.35994/2016 DT. 17.11.2016 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.8343/2017 DT. 13.3.2017 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 14.7.2017 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT. 17.7.2017 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL --------------------------------------

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

sdr/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J

¶22

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c) No.25282 of 2017

¶23

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7^th day of November, 2017

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Ext.P3 is the representation preferred by the

¶26

petitioner before the respondent, the Secretary of Kalamassery Municipality. The grievance voiced by the petitioner in Ext.P3 representation concerns the alleged attempt on the part of the said Municipality to shorten the width of the road referred to in the writ petition. The limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, when this matter came up for admission, is for a direction to the respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 representation within a time frame.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶28

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose the writ petition directing the respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3

¶29

W.P.(c) No.25282 of 2017

¶30

-2-

¶31

representation with notice to the petitioner as also other affected persons, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly.

¶32

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

bng

P.N.Chandran v. Secretary, Kalamassery, Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.N.Chandran v. Secretary, Kalamassery, Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.a.Sebastian Vs the District Collector

Soman Karunakaran Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Pramod Das Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

A.Ziyad Vs the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation

George Philip Vs State of Kerala

Martin Varghese Vs District Collector