J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 21st day of November, 2022 The petitioner, who is one of the Partners of a Building Construction Company, has filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P2, P3, P4, P8 and P11 and seeking to quash the same. The petitioner also sought to direct the respondents not to proceed ahead with Ext.P11.

2. By Ext.P11 notice issued by the Secretary to the Corporation, the petitioner was required to adhere to the final order and demolish an illegal and unauthorised building construction. It is aggrieved by Ext.P11 notice that the petitioner is before this Court.

3. When this writ petition came up for hearing today, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has filed Ext.P13 appeal invoking Section 509 (6) of the Kerala Municipality Act , 1994 and a stay petition before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, against Ext.P11 notice. The petitioner submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is given to the Tribunal to consider the appeal preferred by him.

4. The counsel for the 6th respondent resisted the writ petition and contended that the construction made by the petitioner is obviously illegal and unauthorised. Findin