1. These two cases are inter-connected and can, therefore, be advantageously disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The two cases typically indicate how a determined litigant can, by successful representations, without any basis in law, continue to flout the law by blatantly violating all building regulations in the State.

3. It is necessary to put on record the full facts of the sordid saga of this litigation to get a proper perspective.

4. In the State of Kerala, within the Corporation area of Thiruvananthapuram, the Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") requires certain procedures to be followed and certain permissions to be obtained before anyone puts up a construction on a land falling within the Corporation area. The 4th respondent in O.P. No. 35689 of 2000 and the petitioner in O.P. No. 1563 of 2001, Sarveswaran Nair, made an application for demolishing building No. T.C. XXXVI/IIII situated within the area of Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation and for commencing construction of a residential building. Though exemption was granted conditionally by the District Collector from certain provisions of the Kerala Building Rules, without