Disposed

Shahul Hameed, v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

Kerala HC11 Jul 2024WP(C)/15114/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a notice alleging unauthorised construction in violation of Kerala Municipal Building Rules. The court directed the petitioner to file objections to the provisional order within two weeks, extended interim protection for five weeks, and required the Corporation to consider objections and pass final orders.

What did the court decide?

Two weeks to file objections to provisional order; interim order extended five weeks; Corporation to consider objections and pass final orders within one month.

Shahul Hameed, Vs Kochi Municipal Corporation — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 15114 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 43 YEARS S/O. K.M. MOHAMMEDALI, ALINGAPARAMBIL HOUSE, SYED MOHEMMED COMPLEX, ADVOCATE EASWARA IYER ROAD, PULLEPADY, ERNAKULAM , KOCHI-682 035

¶8

BY ADV. PEEYUS A.KOTTAM

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE, P.B. NO. 1016, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶11

2 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE, P.B. NO. 1016, ERNAKULAM , KOCHI 682 011

¶12

BY ADV. K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, STANDING COUNSEL

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 15114 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 notice issued to him on 06.04.2022 alleging unauthorised construction. The petitioner contends that he was not heard before issuing Ext.P1 order. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Secretary of the Municipal Corporation on 08.02.2023 which reads as follows:-

¶18

“4. All the averments in paragraph No. 1 to 3 are denied by these respondents other than which are specifically admitted hereunder. The petitioner and his family are residing in the building owned by thim in Sayed Muhammed Complex, Ernakulam. The building is aged more than 27 years. The petitioner had made illegal construction in the first floor in violation of Rule 26 of the Kerala Municipal Building Rules, 2019. The petitioner had done illegal construction of 12 meter x 0.60 meters in the rear yard using steel structures. 5. The second respondent have issued notice on 06.04.2022 in order to remove the illegal construction made by the petitioner as per Ext. P1. As the petitioner failed to comply with the Ext.P1 impugned notice, the 2nd respondent on behalf of the 1st respondent issued a provisional order on 02.06.2022 to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner was granted time to remove unauthorised construction as per Ext.P1 notice and only on 02.06.2022 provisional order was issued. Therefore, the notice issued is not against the principle of natural justice, as enough time was provided to the petitioner to remove the illegal construction before Provisional Order was issued. The petitioner has not challenged the Provisional Order in the writ petition.”

¶19

WP(C) NO. 15114 OF 2022

¶20

¶21

Since a provisional order has been issued on 02.06.2022, it is for the petitioner to submit his objections, if any. Two weeks from today is granted to the petitioner to file the objections, if any, to the provisional order issued by the Corporation. On receipt of the objections from the writ petitioner the Corporation will consider the same and pass final orders within one month thereafter.

¶22

The interim order granted by this Court on 04.5.2022 will stand extended for five weeks. In case the petitioner does not file his objections within the time stipulated above, the Corporation will be free to pass appropriate orders pursuant to the provisional order, in accordance with law.

¶23

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶24

SD/-

¶25

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

DCS

¶28

WP(C) NO. 15114 OF 2022

¶29

¶30

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15114/2022

¶31

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶32

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DATED 06.04.2022 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶33

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.C NO. 5453/2020 DATED 02.03.2020.

Shahul Hameed, v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahul Hameed, v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Musthakh, Vs State of Kerala

T.K. Janardanan Nair, Vs State of Kerala

Blessy Boban, Vs the Village Officer

C.C.Hamza Haji Vs Athavanad Grama Panchayath

K.R.Sivadasan Pillai Vs the District Collector

Abhilash.T. Vs Sajeevan K.K.