The court emphasizes the need to provide an opportunity for hearing before taking coercive action against property.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Call for records leading to demolition of the building numbered as KMC-II/63 in Survey No.1000/4B in the ownership and possession of the petitioners and all proceedings pursuant to the same and quash the same by issuing a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

ii. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 4 and 5 not to demolish the building numbered as KMC-II/63 in Survey No.1000/4B in the ownership and possession of the petitioners;

iii. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to issue copies of the complaint as well as the proceedings initiated against the building numbered as KMC-II/63 in Survey No.1000/4B in the ownership and possession of the petitioners;

iv. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or directing 4th respondent to consider and pass orders in Exhibit P9 representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court;

v. Issue an appropriate order to dispense with the production of the English translation of the documents which are in vernacular language;

vi. To issue such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(SIC)

2. Petitioners earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.5765/2017, and the same was disposed as per Ext.P5 judgment, with following directions:

“In that view of the matter and since nothing is clear from Exts.P5 and P11 as to whether the landlords of the building were heard, it is only appropriate that an opportunity is given to the landlords as is sought for. In that view of the matter, the writ petitions are disposed of granting liberty to the landlords to file suitable objection to Exts.P5 and P11 notices within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and if any such objections/representation is received by the Secretary of the Municipality, the same shall be disposed of within one month thereafter, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the landlords. Thereafter the parties would be guided by the said decision.”

3. The petitioners submitted Ext.P6 objection based on the directions in Ext.P5 judgment. Without considering the same, the Municipality is taking action is the submission. No orders passed by the Municipality are challenged in the writ petition. In effect, the petitioners apprehend that there will be coercive steps against the petitioners.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that this writ petition need not be retained here. There can be direction to consider Exts.P6 and P9, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Till then, coercive steps against the petitioners’

property can be kept in abeyance.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The 5^th respondent is directed to consider Exts.P6 and P9, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. Till final orders are passed, coercive steps against the petitioners’ property shall be kept in abeyance.

sd/-