P.D.THOMAS Vs. PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition was originally filed seeking direction against the 1st respondent Municipality to allot a room to the petitioner in the ground floor of the new Municipal Shopping Complex building, for the purpose of shifting his telephone booth. By way of amendment, the petitioner is seeking relief of declaration that he is entitled to get Room No.G-5 in the ground floor of the newly constructed shopping complex viz. Hightech Shopping Complex, on cancelling allotment made in favour of the additional 2nd respondent.

(2.) HISTORY of the case is that, the petitioner was conducting a telephone booth in a room occupied by him in the old building at the Municipal Bus Stand at Perinthalmanna. The Municipality took a decision to demolish that building and to construct a new shopping complex nearby to the said building. According to the petitioner, understanding was that occupants of the old building will be permitted to continue till completion of the construction and the building will be demolished only after allotment of the rooms in the new complex. When steps were initiated for demolition of the old building contrary to the alleged agreement, various occupants have filed a writ petition before this court. This court issued interim order against eviction of those occupants from the old building. Subsequently the Municipality sought permission of the Government for allotment of suitable rooms in the new building to the existing occupants, as and when construction of the new building is completed, on the basis of fresh terms and conditions to be fixed. Ext.P2 is the Government order according sanction to the 1st respondent Municipality to proceed on the above basis. In view of Ext.P2, the petitioner and 13 others gave consent for demolition of the building. On that basis possession of the room which was occupied by the petitioner was handed over to the 1st respondent. The writ petition which was pending before this court was settled in an Adalath wherein the Municipality had agreed that rooms will be allotted to those petitioners in the new shopping complex on the basis of their present status.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit of the 1st respondent it is mentioned that it became impossible to proceed with new construction without demolishing the old shopping complex and therefore the Municipality had approached Government, who in turn convened a conciliation inviting participation of Merchants' Association. The Association submitted a list of persons eligible to be rehabilitated in the new building, as per Ext.R1(a). But those persons who have filed writ petitions before this court have not accepted Ext.R1(a) list and hence the settlement was arrived at the Adalath to allot rooms for those who have contested the matter in the writ petition. Ext.R1(b) is the award passed by the Lok Adalath in this regard. According to the Municipality, it is only on the basis of Ext.R1(a) that room No.G-5 was allotted to the additional 2nd respondent.