Disposed

Thalhath Muhammed v. Manjeri Municipality

Kerala HC23 Sept 2021WP(C)/11990/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Public Interest Litigation challenging dilapidated bus stand building. Court refrains from interference as demolition order is under review by Tribunal, directing authorities to pursue stay lifting.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as no interference warranted pending Tribunal's disposal of revision petition; directions issued to authorities to vacate stay.

Thalhath Muhammed Vs Manjeri Municipality — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 11990 OF 2018

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

THALHATH MUHAMMED, AGED 53 YEARS 53 YEARS, S/O. ABDULLKUTTY HAJI, AVUNNIPURATH HOUSE, COURT ROAD, KACHERIPADI, MANJERI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR MAYA M.

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 MANJERI MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN-676121.

¶12

2 SECRETARY, MANJERI MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN-676121.

¶13

3 MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, MANJERI MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN-676121.

¶14

4 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHAIRPERSON, DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE- MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 505.

¶15

BY ADV R.RANJITH (MANJERI) SRI.K.P.HARISH, SR.G.P. FOR R4

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶18

:: 2 ::

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Dated this the 23^rd day of September, 2021

¶21

S.MANIKUMAR, C.J.

¶22

Petitioner in this writ petition claims to be a resident of Manjeri Municipality. He is stated to be a law abiding citizen and a commuter in buses that starts from old bus stand in the Manjeri Municipality. According to the petitioner, this Public Interest Litigation is filed in the interest of safety and security of the commuter public in Manjeri Municipality.

¶23

Petitioner has contended that the old bus stand in Manjeri town is admittedly in a dilapidated state, causing grave danger to the public at large.

¶24

However, the respondents have not taken urgent remedial action to demolish it, despite their statutory duties and power to do so. There are binding directions issued by the District Collector, the 4^th respondent under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, and resolutions of the Municipality that the building should be demolished, passed from 2014 onwards.

¶25

Contending inter alia that the bus stand in the premises of Manjeri Municipality is in a dilapidated condition, endangering human life, and despite pointing out the same to the Municipality, no action has been taken, instant writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:-

¶26

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶27

:: 3 ::

¶28

“i. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent to implement Exhibit P7 decision and Exhibit P10 direction and to ensure that the dilapidated Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham in old bus stand premises of Manjery municipality is removed within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶29

ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 4^th respondent to invoke its powers under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 to control and regulate vehicular and passenger traffic in the old bus stand of Manjery municipality and to ensure that the dilapidated Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham is removed, within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶30

iii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 2^nd respondent not to permit occupancy of rooms in Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham in the old bus stand in Manjeri Municipality, without obtaining fitness certificate from the Municipal Engineer forthwith.”

¶31

Petitioner has contended that there are three bus stands within Manjeri Municipal limits and the oldest bus stand is known as old bus stand, which is situated in 80 cents of land, within the Municipal area.

¶32

In the said bus stand, there is an old building having 20 rooms each in ground and first floors, which is more than 45 years old.

¶33

Apart from the building, as aforesaid, there are 10 - 12 bus tracks in the said bus stand.

¶34

There is another bus stand having an extent of 1.20 acres of land, namely Seethi Haji bus stand.

¶35

A new bus stand with all the facilities (IGBT) was inaugurated within the municipal area in 2013. The said bus stand is having three acres

¶36

:: 4 ::

¶37

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶38

of land and is having all the facilities. Photographs enclosed along with the writ petition depict that the building is in a dilapidated condition.

¶39

Mr. R. Ranjith (Manjeri), learned counsel appearing for Manjeri Municipality/respondents 1 to 3 submitted that being aggrieved by the order of demolition passed by the Municipality, occupants of the building have filed an appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, and that the matter is still pending.

¶40

It is further submitted that all efforts have been taken by the Municipality to vacate the existing interim stay and to proceed further with the demolition works of the K.S.S Bus Stand Building.

¶41

A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Manjeri Municipality/respondents 1 to 3, which reads as under:

¶42

“2. It is humbly submitted that the occupants in the Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham Bus Stand were given eviction notices with No. R4-2876/14, dated 14/02/2014 to vacate their respective rooms before 15/3/2014 and it is also insisted in the notices that such vacating of the rooms should be reported in writing before the office of the Municipality on the basis of the report of the Municipal Engineer stating that the Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham/R.D.B buildings are in dangerously dilapidated condition.

¶43

On 5/3/2014 itself, the Municipal Chairman was authorized to call a meeting of the licensees of the Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham /R.D.B buildings and to discuss about the necessity of demolishing the buildings by the Municipal Council. The Municipality has always assured them that they will be given priority in the new building with the license fees and advance amount that would be decided later by the Municipal Council after construction of the new building. Though all efforts have taken by the Municipality, the meeting with the licensees did not gain the needed result.

¶44

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶45

:: 5 ::

¶46

Further, the petitioner in this Writ Petition has preferred W.P.(C) 1046/2017 stating that the building concerned is in dilapidated condition and it should be demolished expeditiously and the said case was disposed by this Hon'ble Court vide Exhibit P4, directing the Secretary of the Municipality to consider and pass orders on the representation considered by the petitioner, within a period of six weeks after hearing the petitioner and other persons likely to be affected by the orders to be passed by the 2^nd respondent, dated 17/03/2021.

¶47

Later the petitioner preferred a Contempt Case as Contempt Case (Civil) No. 1762 of 2017 and during the pendency of the Case, the respondent complied with the order and the Contempt Case was disposed of by order dated 23/11/2017 finding that the directions in the judgment dated 17/03/2017 in W.P(C) No. 1046 of 2017 have been complied with by the respondent. True Copy of the judgment in Contempt Case (C) No. 1762 of 2017 in W.P. (C) 1046/2017, dated 17/03/2017 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1[a).

¶48

Earlier, the Revenue Inspector reported that the concrete ceiling of the K.S.S Building in the western side was about to be tumble down and it may cause accidents to the public in his report dated 29/06/2017.

¶49

The Assistant Engineer in the Municipality in his report, dated 04/07/2017 stated that the K.S.S Bus Stand building, which is situated in the centre of the Manjeri Town, was constructed for about 50 years back. The said building was constructed as a reinforced concrete structure using masonry wall. During the inspection of the building, it is seen that there are several ruptures and fungus marks in the structure. There are also leakages due to rain. Moreover, there are ruptures nearby the beam which is the important part ot the building and also on other parts. The inner area of the slabs were broken and fell down already in several areas. Due to that, the steel bars in the slabs were exposed towards the outer side and they were rusted away already. Slab is the structural element that takes the load initially and transfer it through the beam, then through the pillars and finally rests on the floor through the footing. When the slab takes the load, it acts as an external moment and the moment to resist the Beam is completely involved in the reinforcement of the slab. Here, the covering below the slab has ruined already and the reinforcement is rusted away and its yield strength has lost partially. Therefore the slab may damage immediately or may fail in long run. For the above reasons, due to the leakage of water or by the foundation settlement, there are chances for more cracks in the building. That will affect the whole structure. Thus it is reported that the building cannot withstand any more additional loading. Moreover, the masonry can only be kept

¶50

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶51

:: 6 ::

¶52

as a barrier. For the above reasons, it is reported that there are possibilities of differential settlement and damages while loading the existing and upcoming weights. On basis of the above inspection, it is reported that the said building is not safe as it is a place where hundreds of people come and go on daily basis, there are more chances for huge losses including loss of lives and due to the fact that the repairing of the building is not possible and it may incur the same expense as of constructing a new building, it would be appropriate to vacate the existing shops and the occupants and to prohibit the entry of the public to the building. True copy of the report of the Assistant Engineer, dated 04/07/2017 along with the English Translation is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(b).

¶53

It is humbly submitted that further again as per the 4th No. decision of the Municipal Council (File No. E2-131 17/17) dated 18/08/2017, Municipality decided to give eviction notices to the licensees of the K.S.S Building considering the dangerous situation of the building.

¶54

Another a meeting was conducted on 19/09/2017 presided by the Chairperson of the Municipality with the license holders and certain decisions were taken. As the construction of the new building has to be begun as expeditiously as possible, all the license holders were directed to be vacated on or before 30/9/2017 and notices (No. R4- 2876/14) informing the same were issued to them on 19/09/2017 itself.

¶55

Further as per the No. 1st decision taken by the Municipal Council Convened on 10/10/2017, it was decided to collect all pending rent due to the Municipality by the licensees in the K.S.S building until 30/09/2017 and to cancel the licenses of the 27 licensees in the building from 09/10/2017 unanimously.

¶56

Then the occupants gave a communication to the Municipality dated 10/10/2017 stating that they were not heard before a decision is taken and issuing eviction notices (R4/E2/13117/2017) dated 13/09/2017 and intimated that against the same, they are prepared to file a Contempt Case before this Hon'ble Court. It was absolutely false and the occupants were given proper notices always and the communication with them regarding the danger that the public may suffer including them has been a gradual process till date.

¶57

It is true that on 14/02/2018, while one Mr. Irshad, S/o. Mayinkutti residing at Malavam House - a commuter, was walking out of the Bus Stand building through the area where a transformer of KSEB stands, a concreate piece fell off the roof of the building and though he avoided by slipping away, he fell down supporting with his hand, he was injured and bone in the hand was fractured. He had undergone treatment in Medical College, Manjeri and applied for demolishing the obsolete

¶58

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶59

:: 7 ::

¶60

building for creating a new one and also for granting his medical expenses.

¶61

On 26/02/2018, the Deputy Collector directed the Municipality to take appropriate actions immediately on a petition preferred by one Ms. Fathima Suhra and Others alleging that the Bus Stand Building is used by the public including women and students and the Municipality could not take a decision for the last 10 years regarding its rebuilding and that intoxicants are sold openly around the building.

¶62

Considering the dangerous situation of the building, the appeal preferred by one Mr. Feroz Babu, claiming to be the Secretary, Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham Stall Association, an unregistered Association, Manjeri Municipal Bus Stand Building, Manjeri, challenging the proceedings rejecting the renewal of the licenses of the occupants was dismissed by the Municipal Council vide 16th no. decision on 24/03/2018 and said information was communicated to him on 26/03/2018 as no.R4-2876/2014 communication.

¶63

Then the said Mr. Feroz Babu challenged the decision of the Council rejecting the appeal before the learned Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram as Revision Petition No. 31 of 2018. The revision petition was allowed by the learned Tribunal and it was held that "impugned order No. R4/2876/14 dated 26/3/18 issued by the respondent and the same is produced as Annexure P1. As per the said document, it is seen that the Municipality issued the said notice on the basis of the decision No. 17 dated 24/3/2018 taken by the municipal council are set aside. The respondent is directed to consider the issue once again afresh after affording an opportunity to the petitioner and shall take a decision within 60 days. Further, the respondent municipality before arriving a decision, must seek the help of an expert engineer". True copy of the order of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram in R.P. No. 31/2018, dated 9/10/2018 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(C).

¶64

lt is humbly submitted that even before the order of the Tribunal, Exhibit R1(b) - stability report was prepared by the then Assistant Engineer in Municipality, Sri. Mubarak C.K., who has Sufficient experience, expertise and educational qualification for analysis of a building to check if it is in dilapidated and obsolete condition and preparation of the Stability Report. The said engineer is qualified BE and ME (Structural) and also has sufficient experience in government service and also in private sector. But unfortunately, the Municipality

¶65

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶66

:: 8 ::

¶67

could not produce it on time before the Tribunal, though it was pleaded that the decision to demolish the building was taken on the basis of the Stability Report from the engineer concerned.

¶68

The order of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram in R.P. No. 31/2018, dated 9/10/2018 has been discussed in detail by the Council of the Manjeri Municipality and the matter was considered afresh and considering the fact that the Assistant Engineer in the Municipality who has analysed and prepared the stability report is qualified enough and has the expertise to prepare such a report, directed the occupants to vacate the building and premises and decided to demolish the building. Thus the Manjeri municipal council was decided to take immediate steps to demolish the said building vide decision No. 11, dated 13/01/2020. True copy of the decision no. 11 of the Manjeri Municipal Council, dated 13/01/2020 issued by the Chairperson of the Municipality stated it to be a true copy along with the English translation is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(d).

¶69

Though the matter was considered afresh by the Manjeri Municipal Council as directed by the Learned Triburnal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram again Mr. Feroz Babu, claiming to be the Secretary, Kurikkal Smaraka Soudham Stall Association, an unregistered Association, Manjeri Municipal Bus Stand Building, Manjeri, challenged the No. 11 decision of the council, dated 13/01/2020 by preferring R.P. No. 23/2020. True copy of the revision petition filed in R.P. No. 23/2020 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, dated 14/03/2020 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(e). The learned tribunal stayed the No. 11 decision of the council, dated 13/01/2020 decision without appreciating the merits of the case vide order dated 17/3/2020. True copy of the order of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram in I.A. No.360/2020 in Revision Petition No.23/2020, dated 17/3/2020 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1(f).

¶70

It is humbly submitted that the above R.P 23/2020 which is pending before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions was posted for the appearance of the Municipality on 17/04/2020. The municipality has entrusted a counsel to appear before the tribunal with all relevant records to vacate the stay and to file the written statement before the said date. On 17/04/2020, there was no sitting for the tribunal and case was notified to be posted on 26/08/2020, again

¶71

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶72

:: 9 ::

¶73

notified to 19/11/2020 and further to 22/02/2021. It is submitted that only on 22/02/2021, the counsel for the respondent could appear before the Tribunal after the return of notice for the appearance of the respondent. On 22/02/2021, the Hon'ble Tribunal adjourned the case to 14/05/2021, ordered the respondent to file written statement. On 14/05/2021, the statement along with counter affidavit to vacate the stay was prepared to file before the tribunal. Unfortunately, the case was adjourned by notification to 27/09/2021. The reason for not filing the written statement on 14/05/2021 was that the counsel appearing for the revision petitioner is practicing at Attingal Court Center, Thiruvananthapuram and hence the counsel appearing for the respondent herein could not serve the copy on the said date and thus the written statement could not be made part of the records. It is humbly submitted that the written statement as well as the counter affidavit on I.A. No. 360/2020 in Revision Petition No. 23/2020 to vacate the stay is all prepared and will be on records before 7/9/2021 before the Hon'ble Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram. Therefore it is humbly submitted that all efforts were taken by the Municipality to vacate the existing interim stay and to proceed further with the demolition works of the K.S.S Bus Stand Building.

¶74

It is most humbly submitted that though there was an order of this Hon'ble Court to file a detail counter affidavit/statement with all documents and also to explain the steps taken for the disposal of Revision No. 23/2020 pending on the file óf the Tribunal as last chance when the matter was posted on 02/09/2021, only dụè to the fact that all the necessary documents were entrusted to the Counsel appearing for the Municipality in the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, the officials in Municipality could not procure all the details and documents on time and prepare a statement and entrust it to the Standing Counsel appearing before this Hon'ble Court. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that the Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality was not in a position to file the counter affidavit/ statement before 16/09/2021, when the matter was posted for disposal. On the very next day that is on 17/09/2021 itself, a statement was prepared with all the necessary documents and it was handed over to the Standing Counsel. It is most humbly submitted that there is no willful latches or negligence from the part of Municipality.

¶75

Pursuant to the direction of this court, a memo has been filed by

¶76

Mr.K.P.Harish, learned Senior Government Pleader, on 22.9.2021, along with

¶77

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶78

:: 10 ::

¶79

a report of the Executive Engineer, PWD Building Division, Malappuram. Report of the Executive Engineer, PWD Building Division, Malappuram, reads as under:

¶80

“REPORT CALLED FOR BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT ON THE WRIT PETITION NO. WP(C)NO.11990/2018 HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN CONNECTION WITH THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF THE OLD MUNICIPAL BUS STAND BUILDING AT MANJERI MUNICIPALITY.

¶81

The Assistant Executive Engineer and the Assistant Engineer, PWD Buildings, Manjeri, the Municipal Secretary Manjeri Municipality, the representative from the Eranad Taluk are carried out joint inspection on3.9.2021 in the old Municipal Bus stand Building at Manjeri.

¶82

It is further submitted that, the municipal old bus stand building is constructed approximately 50 years back. The actual age of the building will be reported by the Municipal authorities. The said building is constructed in a pattern of two 'L' shaped building joined together so as to use the centre portion as parking area for other vehicle than buses. Two outer sides are facing two main roads Manjeri to Malappuram and Manjeri to Pandikkad. And the other two sides are facing internal roads of the bus stand for in an out for buses. The outer side of the building facing the main road has occupied by commercial shops and the other two faces has arranged for bus parking for 12 buses.

¶83

During the inspection, it was observed that the said old building is in dilapidated condition. At many portions, the outer concrete is seems to start spalling-down and hence the steel bars inside are found corroded. Due to corroded steel bars, some of the columns and beams are found extremely dangerous condition as they may collapse at any time. Severe water leakages are observed in many portions of the slabs in the building. This leakage in slabs, especially in heavy rain may affect the old electrical fittings and ultimately leads to electrical shock accidents.

¶84

It is also submitted that, the said old building is situated in the main junction of the Manjeri Town. As the Building constructed years back, they left only very less space for the main roads. If a new building is proposed to construct after demolishing the old building will facilitate the local Municipal authorities for better town planning.

¶85

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶86

:: 11 ::

¶87

Therefore, this office in an opinion that the old Municipal Bus Stand Building may be demolished and construct a new building by giving sufficient space for the main roads and the road junction so as to avoid traffic jams. Photographs of the said damaged structure elements of the buildings are enclosed herewith.”

¶88

In the said report, it is stated that as the building in question is constructed years back, they left only very less space for the main road. If a new building is proposed to be constructed, after demolishing of the old building, will facilitate the local Municipal authorities for better town planning. Thus, it is opined that the old Municipal Bus Stand Building may be demolished and a new building be constructed, by giving sufficient space for the main roads and the road junction, so as to avoid traffic jams.

¶89

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the matter, at this stage, as revision petition is stated to be pending before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, against the order of demolition.

¶90

However, in the light of the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by respondents 1 to 3 at the report, which we have extracted, that all efforts should be taken for vacating the interim order of stay granted by the Tribunal and for the disposal of the revision petition, the Tribunal should consider the merits inter se, and dispose of the revision petition. We only direct the respondents 1 to 3, Manjeri Municipality

¶91

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶92

:: 12 ::

¶93

authorities, to take effective steps for the above forthwith, and act according to the decision taken by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, without any further delay.

¶94

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶95

SD/S.MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE

¶96

SD/SHAJI P CHALY JUDGE

¶97

jes

¶98

W.P.(C)NO.11990 OF 2018

¶99

:: 13 ::

¶100

APPENDIX

¶101

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶102

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶103

EXHIBIT P1(a) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶104

EXHIBIT P1(b) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶105

EXHIBIT P1(c) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶106

EXHIBIT P1(d) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶107

EXHIBIT P1(e) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶108

EXHIBIT P1(f) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶109

EXHIBIT P1(g) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF THE BUILDING IN MANJERI MUNICIPAL BUS STAND.

¶110

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 05.03.2014 OF THE MANJERI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

¶111

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 04.01.2017. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 17.03.2017 IN W.P. (C) NO. 1046 OF 2017.

¶112

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.11.2017 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN COMPLIANCE OF EXHIBIT P4 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

¶113

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.08.2017 OF THE MEETING OF THE MANJERI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL TO BE HELD ON 18.08.2017 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

¶114

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECORD OF THE DECISIONS TAKEN ON THE MEETING OF THE MANJERI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ON 18.08.2017 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

¶115

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED ONE IRSHAD BEFORE THE SECRETARY, MANJERI MUNICIPALITY DATED NIL WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

¶116

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PRESCRIPTION ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE TO MR. IRSHAD DATED 14.02.2018.

¶117

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR TO THE SECRETARY, MANJERI MUNICIPALITY WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

¶118

//TRUE COPY //

¶119

P.S. TO JUDGE

Thalhath Muhammed v. Manjeri Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thalhath Muhammed v. Manjeri 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

Leelamma Rajan @ Sosamma, Vs State of Kerala

Kemi, Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Abdul Khani

P.Prabhulla, Vs the District Collector

T.M.Abdul Salam, Vs B.Mohammed Jamal

Varghese Chacko Vs State of Kerala