C G GOPALAKRISNAN NAIR Vs. KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, it is unnecessary to issue notice to the 4th respondent.

(2.) EXT.P1 is an order issued to the petitioner requiring demolition of a structure constructed allegedly encroaching into road puramboke. On receipt of this notice, petitioner filed Ext.P2 Appeal before the 3rd respondent along with Ext.P3 stay petition. While appeal and stay petition were pending, Municipality issued Ext.P4 notice, again calling upon the petitioner to demolish the structure. At that stage, petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C).16795/2012. The writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P5 judgment relegating the petitioner to pursue statutory remedies. It is also directed that Ext.P4 will be kept in abeyance for a period of one month. According to the petitioner in pursuance to the judgment, Ext.P6 Appeal has been filed which is also pending before the

(3.) IN such circumstances, I direct the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 Appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P1 in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible at any rate within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. It is also directed that in the meanwhile, further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P4 will be kept in abeyance. Writ petition is disposed of as above.