Disposed

Sr. Blessy Maria Sabs v. the District Collector

Kerala HC1 Jul 2022WP(C)/6578/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the location of an Aerobic Waste Management Unit causing obstruction. The Court observed a pending suit but directed the Municipality to consider the petitioner's representation and issue appropriate orders within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 4th respondent to consider Ext.P8 and pass appropriate orders within one month with notice to the petitioner.

Sr. Blessy Maria Sabs Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

W.P.(C) NO.6578 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SR. BLESSY MARIA SABS,

¶8

AGED 42 YEARS, SISTER SUPERIOR, ST. MICHAELS ADORATION CONVENT, THATHAMPALLY P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688 013.

¶9

BY ADVS.B.PRAMOD BIJU VIGNESWAR

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA-688 001.

¶12

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE RDO, ALAPPUZHA-688 012.

¶13

3 ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA-688 012 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

4 THE SECRETARY, ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA-688 012.

¶15

R1,R2 SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

R3,R4 SRI. AZAD BABU R., STANDING COUNSEL, ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

-2-

¶19

W.P.(C) NO.6578 OF 2022

¶20

P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶21

W.P. (C) No.6578 of 2022

¶22

Dated this the 1^st day of July, 2022

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The above writ petition is filed with the following

¶25

prayers:-

¶26

“i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the respondents 3 and 4 to forthwith remove the Aerobic Waste Management Unit (No.14) put up on the eastern side of Kidangamparambu Junction – Thathampalli CYMA Junction road in Ward No.16 of the 3^rd respondent Municipality. ii) Pass such other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶27

The main grievance of the petitioner is about a

¶28

Aerobic Waste Management Unit put up on the eastern side of Kidangamparambu Junction – Thathampalli CYMA Junction

¶29

road in Ward No.16 of the 3^rd respondent Municipality. According to the petitioner, this creates environmental problem and the movement of pedestrains are completely obstructed because of this.

¶30

-3-

¶31

W.P.(C) NO.6578 OF 2022

¶32

The counsel for the petitioner submits that, if it is shifted to the other side of the road, the main grievance will be redressed. In such circumstances, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation before the 4^th respondent. According to the petitioner, this is a matter to be considered by the 4^th respondent seriously. If the Aerobic Waste Management Unit can be shifted to the other side, it is submitted by the petitioner that the pedestrians can walk freely through the road. These are matters to be considered by the 4^th respondent while deciding Ext.P8.

¶33

It is submitted by the counsel for the Municipality that a suit is pending before the civil court. Admittedly, there is no interim order in the suit. If that is the case, there is no problem in considering Ext.P8 by the 4^th respondent.

¶34

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶35

i) There wil be a direction to the 4^th respondent to consider Ext.P8 and pass appropriate orders in it, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioner.

¶36

ii) The petitioner is free to produce a copy of the

¶37

-4-

¶38

W.P.(C) NO.6578 OF 2022

¶39

writ petition along with a certified copy of this judgment before the 4^th respondent for compliance. iii) The 4^th respondent shall not reject Ext.P8 stating that the suit is pending before the civil court.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN

JUDGE

bpr

-5-

W.P.(C) NO.6578 OF 2022

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶48

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED 28.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA UNDER THE JJ ACT TO THE ARCH BISHOP DR. MATHEW KAVUKATT CHARITABLE BOARDING HOME. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE RECOGNITION DATED 01.04.2021 ISSUED BY THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR ORPHANAGES AND OTHER CHARITABLE HOMES TO THE ARCH BISHOP DR. MATHEW KAVUKATT CHARITABLE BOARDING HOME. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 02.02.2021 SHOWING PAYMENT OF TAX IN RESPECT OF THE MARIAN HOMOEO CENTRE. EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE AEROBIC WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT (NO.14). EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN MANGALAM DAILY DATED 11.12.2021 IN RELATION TO THE STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE AEROBIC WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT( NO.14). EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PARTIALLY BUILT DRAINAGE CANAL NEAR THE AEROBIC WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT (NO.14). EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 29.02.2020 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.02.2022 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 05.02.2022 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶49

-6-

¶50

W.P.(C) NO.6578 OF 2022

¶51

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶52

EXHIBIT R3(A) PLAINT IS O.S.NO.295 OF 2020. EXHIBIT R3(B) MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 10.03.2022. EXHIBIT R3(C) CLEAN CITY PROJECT. EXHIBIT R4(D) MATHRUBHUMI DATED 25.03.2022.

Sr. Blessy Maria Sabs v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sr. Blessy Maria Sabs v. the District Collector

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

Padmaja, Vs State of Kerala

Faisath Vs the State of Kerala

Secretary , Chenkal Grama Panchayat Vs Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions

Brd Motors Limited Vs Thrikkur Grama Panchayath

Dr.K.P.Ayyappan Vs Secretary to Government

Sudev Sathian Vs Corporation of Thrissur