SIVAPRASAD S SHENOY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(2.) Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:

(3.) We heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Learned Counsel for the petitioner reiterated his contentions. Learned Counsel for the fourth respondent would submit that the construction was made by the petitioner in 2009, and not in 2004, for which the fourth respondent filed Ext.R4(a) complaint. He further points out Sections 406, 408, 550 and 551 of the Kerala Municipality Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to contend that the police have authority in the matter. Learned Counsel for the Municipality would submit that the matter is pending consideration before the Municipality. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner was called to the police station and the third respondent will not interfere in the matter.