BIJOY ISSAC Vs. NOUSHEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court seeking the following relief:

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is the Secretary of the Residents' Association. There are 48 flat owners in the said Association. There is no proper drinking water connection to the said flat. All of them are occupying the flat for the last 1 = years. Therefore, the petitioner Association started construction of laying pipe by depositing the cost of '.3,75,000/= to the Water Authority and '.1,70,000/= to the P.W.D. and the work was started and 1/3rd of the work is completed. Now, respondents 1 to 3 demanded to extend the pipe connection upto the residence of the members of their unit at the cost of the petitioner. They are creating horrible situations and they have destroyed the pipe fixed therein. Respondents 4 and 5 have not taken any action against the illegalities of respondents 1 to 3 and hence the petitioner is before us.

(3.) BESIDES the same, learned counsel for the additional sixth respondent also brought to our notice the guidelines based on which apparently the Counter Affidavit is filed. Therein, we notice that guideline 18 reads as follows: