Quashed

Dominic Antony v. Eloor Municipality

Kerala HC28 Nov 2022WP(C)/20285/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order issued by the Eloor Municipality for unauthorized construction. The court quashed the order for violating natural justice due to lack of service and hearing, directing the Secretary to hear both parties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; direction to Municipality Secretary to hear parties within one month and pass appropriate orders.

Dominic Antony Vs Eloor Municipality — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 20285 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

DOMINIC ANTONY
AGED 46
S/O. ANTONY, 28/ 62 A, NELLIKKAPARAMBU, MANJUMMAL- 683 501
BY ADVS.
G.KRISHNAKUMAR
B.S.SURAJ KRISHNA

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1ELOOR MUNICIPALITY
MUNICIPAL BUILDING, UDYOGMANDAL, PIN-683 501 REPRESENTED BY IT'S
SECRETARY

¶10

2 OVERSEER.

¶11

ELOOR MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL BUILDING, UDYOGMANDAL, PIN- 683 501
3BABY JOSEPH,
S/O FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 55,
MUZHOOR HOUSE, FACT TOWNSHIP, UDVOGMANDAL- 683 501
BY ADVS.

¶12

SHRI.K.S.ARUNKUMAR, SC, ELOOR MUNICIPALITY
C.S.UMAR FAROOK

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P.(C)No.20285 OF 2022.

¶15

¶16

J UDGMENT

¶17

Dated this the 28^th day of November, 2022

¶18

The 3^rd respondent in this writ petition approached respondents 1 and 2 with a complaint that the petitioner has carried out certain unauthorised constructions and started functioning of a "Pandal Decoration Unit" in the said building without the permission of the Municipality. Since the said complaint was not acted upon by the Municipality, the 3^rd respondent approached this Court by filing W.P. (C).No.24978 of 2021. This Court, by Ext.P4 judgment dated 11.11.2021, disposed of the said writ petition directing the Municipality to consider the complaint preferred by the 3^rd respondent and to pass appropriate orders after hearing the parties. Pursuant to Ext.P4 judgment, the Municipality issued notice to the petitioner and passed Ext.P2 order which is impugned in this writ petition. The case of the petitioner is that, a

¶19

W.P.(C)No.20285 OF 2022.

¶20

¶21

copy of the complaint referred to in Ext.P4 judgment was not served on him and he was not given enough opportunity to defend the complaint before the 1^st respondent. According to him, Ext.P2 order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality and the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent.

¶23

In the facts and circumstances of the case

¶24

and having regard to the submissions made before this Court and taking note of the grievance of the petitioner that he was not given sufficient opportunity to put forward his case before 1^st respondent, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶25

(a) Ext.P2 order is quashed, being passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶26

(b) There will be a direction to the Secretary of the 1^st respondent Municipality to hear the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent on the complaint preferred by the 3^rd respondent and pass appropriate orders thereon

¶27

W.P.(C)No.20285 OF 2022.

¶28

¶29

within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Before the parties are heard, the petitioner shall be provided with the copy of the complaint of the 3^rd respondent referred to in Ext.P4 judgment and also copy of the report of the overseer referred to in Ext.P2 order.

¶30

Sd/MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶31

Raj.28.11.2022.

¶32

W.P.(C)No.20285 OF 2022.

¶33

¶34

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20285/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 22.07.2021 ISSUED
UNDER SECTION 447 (1) OF THE KERALA MUNICIPALITY ACT
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.4.2022 OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 08.04.2022 ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.11.2021 IN W.P.
(C) 24978/2021 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT

Dominic Antony v. Eloor Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dominic Antony v. Eloor 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

Nishad Azeem Vs State of Kerala

Haseeb Haneef Vs the Sub Collector

Sindhu Vs the State of Kerala

Ummer Bava E, Vs the Trikkalangode Grama Panchayath

M/S. Aiswarya Granites Vs Elamadu Grama Panchayat

Satish Murthi Vs the Secretary, Kalamassery Municipality