The court determines compliance with prior orders and procedural adherence in municipal rent assessments.

JUDGMENT

The above contempt case is filed alleging violation of the judgment dated 14.03.2025 in WP(C) No.2636/2025. When this contempt case came up for consideration on 21.11.2025, this Court passed the following order:

“After going through the pleadings in the Contempt case, I am of the prima facie opinion that, respondent committed contempt.

The respondent will appear in person or through Video Conference before this Court on

10/12/2025.

In the meanwhile, if the directions are complied, or if the judgment is varied or modified, the appearance is dispensed with. Issue a copy of this order to the Standing Counsel, who will communicate the same to the respondent.

Post on 10/12/2025.”

2. Accordingly the respondent appeared through video conferencing. An affidavit is also filed by the respondent, the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder:

“7. Thereafter, a team of the Engineering Department of the Municipality was constituted on 22.02.2025 to inspect and study the construction carried out in the building. After disposal of the writ petition by judgment dated 14,03.2025 in W.P.(C) No.2636 of 2025, the petitioner was heard in person in compliance with the directions of this Hon'ble Court.

8. Based on the report submitted by the Engineering Team, the Municipality forwarded a recommendation to the Chief Engineer, Local Self Government Department on 03.06.2025 seeking fixation of rent for the newly constructed portion of the building.

9. As per the reply received from the Chief Engineer, Local Self Government Department dated 15.10.2025, the monthly rent for the newly constructed portion was fixed at Rs.1,02,701/-. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Municipal Council on 01.11.2025 by including it in the Council agenda for approval of the revised rent.

3. The counsel for the respondent submitted that the rent is already assessed. As far as the other directions are concerned, a proceedings is already initiated and the same is already placed before the Council of Kottayam Municipality. In the next Council meeting, it will be considered.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent will allow the petitioner to execute a rent agreement subject to the final decision of the Council. The respondent will do the needful to execute the rent agreement within two days.

With the above observation, this contempt case is closed.