Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.J.ABRAHAM, AGED 48 versus THE SECRETARY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.J.ABRAHAM, AGED 48 v. THE SECRETARY - WP(C) No. 28301 of 2006(T) [2006] RD-KL 3546 (15 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 28301 of 2006(T)

1. K.J.ABRAHAM, AGED 48,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE SECRETARY,
... Respondent

2. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT.

For Petitioner :SRI.R.T.PRADEEP

For Respondent :SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :15/12/2006

O R D E R

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.

W.P.(C)NO. 28301 of 2006 Dated this 15th day of December, 2006

JUDGMENT

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for various reliefs including an order to restrain the first respondent from continuing with the tarring of the metalled way which passes through the southern side of the petitioner's property and for an order quashing Ext.P7.

2. Having regard to the decision which is being taken hereunder, I am of the view that the legality or otherwise of Ext.P7 need not be considered. I do not find any justification for restraining tarring work which has been undertaken by the Corporation. The metalling and tarring work of the road in question will continue. However, the request of the petitioner that he should be permitted to reconstruct the old compound wall on the existing foundation appears to be reasonable. Under these circumstances, the writ petition will stand disposed of with the following directions:

i). The Corporation is permitted to go ahead with the metalling and taring of the road in question. The petitioner is WPC No.28301/2006 2 directed to file an application before the Corporation for permission to reconstruct the compound wall on the foundation which exists and upon receiving that application the Corporation will consider the same and issue necessary permission to the petitioner without delaying the matter unnecessarily. ii). The petitioner will submit an application before the Corporation within three days of receiving a copy of this judgment. The Corporation will take a decision on the application as directed above within another seven days of receiving that application. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge dpk


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.