Kerala High Court
T.Krishnakumar vs The Cochin Devaswom Board on 5 April, 2022
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
WP(C) No.7359/2022 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
Tuesday, the 5th day of April 2022 / 15th Chaithra, 1944
WP(C) NO. 7359 OF 2022 (T)
PETITIONER:
T.KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. AMMINIKUTTY AMMA, RESIDING AT
THEVARKKATTIL HOUSE, KAROOR MADAM NORTH, LOKAMALLESWARAM,
KODUNGALLUR-680 664.
RESPONDENTS:
1. THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, OFFICE OF
THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR-680 001.
2. THE SECRETARY COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN DEVASWOM
BOARD, THRISSUR-680 001.
3. THE DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE OF THE
COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR-680 001.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ESTATE) COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, OFFICE OF
THE COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR-680 001.
5. ADDL/R5 THE CHIEF VIGILANCE OFFICER, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, ROUND
NORTH, THRISSUR PIN-680 001 [ADDL.R5 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 28/03/2022 IN WP(C) 7359/2022]
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to issue an interim direction directing the respondents not
implement Ext.P4 in any manner, until the disposal of this Writ Petition.
This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition
and the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and this court's order dated
04.04.2022 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.B.KRISHNA MANI,
N.V.SANDHYA & DHANUJA M.S., Advocates for the petitioner and of
SRI.K.P.SUDHEER, Advocate for R1 and of Standing Counsel for Addl R5 the
court passed the following:
WP(C) No.7359/2022 2/3
ANIL K. NARENDRAN & P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JJ.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.7359 of 2022
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2022
ORDER
Anil K. Narendran, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents at length.
During the course of arguments, the specific case put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the additional constructions or extensions noticed by the concerned officer in Ext.R1(B) were in existence when the petitioner's father was in occupation of the premises in question, who died in the year 1986.
Reserved for judgment.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE MIN 05-04-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar WP(C) No.7359/2022 3/3 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7359/2022 Exhibit R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, CDB.