Kerala High Court
Liddy Roazario vs Mulavukadu Grama Panchayath on 19 January, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/20TH SRAVANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 18046 of 2009 (A)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------------
LIDDY ROAZARIO, W/O. ABDON ROZARIO
AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT VICTORY COTTAGE
VALLARPADOM.P.O., MULAVUKADU VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.SMT.T.P.JULIE PAUL
SRI.S.RAJKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
----------------------
1. MULAVUKADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
MULAVUKADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM.
3. KERALA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
SASTHRA BHAVAN, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM-4
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMEMT
GOVT. OF KERALA.
4. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST
PRARYAVAN BHAVAN, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI.
BY ADVS. SRI.K.G.SARATHKUMAR
SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, MATSYAFED
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SAIGY JOSEPH PALATTY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-08-2016,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 18046 of 2009 (A)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-
-----------------------------------
EXT.P1 - COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4321415 DATED 19.01.2009
ISSUED BY MULAVUKADU VILLAGE OFFICE.
EXT.P2 - COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17.07.2008 ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL
---------------------------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
sp
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
----------------------------------
W.P(C). No.18046 of 2009-A
----------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of August, 2016
JUDGMENT
None appears for the petitioner when the matter was called for hearing.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the refusal to number a building constructed by her, alleging violation of the costal zone regulations. The petitioner was granted an interim order as prayed for on 29/06/2009. Obviously, the building would have been numbered on the basis of the said order. The 3rd respondent, who is the authority, had been served notice through the Standing Counsel at the time of admission itself. The 3rd respondent W.P(C). No.18046 of 2009-A 2 has not cared to file a Counter Affidavit. In such circumstance, the interim order is made absolute.
The writ petition is allowed. No costs.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
//True Copy// P.A. to Judge.
sp/11/08/16