MADHAVAN PILLAI.G. LALU vs SECRETARY, KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9860

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
MADHAVAN PILLAI.G. LALU – Appellant
Versus
SECRETARY, KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 2117 OF 2024

Important Points

Petitioners may seek redress through representation regarding unauthorized construction allegations if procedural compliance is followed.

Subject

Administrative Law - Writ Petition

Act Referred

Municipality Act

Headnote

The writ petition seeks a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to take action regarding unauthorized construction by the third and fourth respondents. The court examined a statement by the first respondent regarding compliance with the Municipality Act and ruled that the petitioner could submit a representation for any grievances. The court affirmed the need for the Secretary to consider submissions from involved parties following appropriate procedures.

Result: Writ Petition disposed of with directions.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.B.S.SURESH (CHIRAKKARA), SHRI.VIPIN VIJAYAN, SMT.LAKSHMI SURESH, SRI.T.S.SREEKUMAR
For the Respondents: SHRI. C.N. PRABHAKARAN, SC, SHRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW (SR.), SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN, SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA, SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL, SHRI.SHINTO MATHEW ABRAHAM, SMT.LEAH RACHEL NINAN, SHRI.MATHEW NEVIN THOMAS, SHRI.KARTHIK RAJAGOPAL, SHRI.KURIAN ANTONY MATHEW, SHRI.JOE S. ADHIKARAM

Table of Content
1. writ of mandamus sought regarding unauthorized construction. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court allows representation and mandates consideration. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“a) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing to 1st respondent to take an appropriate steps or order for removing unauthorized construction of the respondent No: 3 and 4.

b) To issue such other appropriate writ or order of direction as this Honorable court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” (SIC)

2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue appropriate direction to the 1^st respondent to take appropriate steps or order for removing the unauthorised construction made by respondent Nos.3 and 4.

3. Now, a statement is filed by the 1st respondent, in which an order dated 01.10.2024 is produced as Annexure-1. This Court perused the same. In Annexure-1, it is stated that there is no violation of the provisions of the Municipality Act and the same is stated in the concluding portion of Annexure-1. But the counsel for the petitioner takes me through the previous paragraph of the concluding paragraph and stated that there is some violation of the and he may be able to convince the same to the Secretary. If that be the case, the petitioner can file a representation before the Secretary to the Municipality narrating the specific violation of the provisions and if such an application is filed, the Secretary will consider the same with notice to the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: