SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12600

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
RAJALAKSHMI K.R – Appellant
Versus
THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 4725 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN, SMT.KARTHIKA PEETHAMBARAN, SMT.NEERAJA VENUGOPAL, SHRI.ARJUN J DAS, SMT.VINEETHA S. LAL
For the Respondents: SHRI.S.JAMAL, SC, THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY, SRI.MANU ROY

The court held that orders must be reconsidered upon providing an opportunity for hearing to the affected parties.

Headnote:The petitioner's writ petition seeks to quash orders and requests a translation waiver. The court identifies a lack of hearing regarding Ext.P9 and directs its reconsideration with an opportunity for a hearing. The court sets aside Ext.P9, ordering appropriate action within six weeks.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request to quash orders. (Para 1 , 2)
2. no hearing led to the order being set aside. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"(i). call for records leading to passing of Exhibits P7 and P9 orders from the 2nd respondent and quash Exhibits P7 and P9 orders, by issuing a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction.

(ii). Petitioner also prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the English translation of the documents produced in the Vernacular Language.

And (iii). Issue such other reliefs as deem fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case "

[SIC]

2. The short point raised by the petitioner is that, Ext.P9 is an order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. When this writ petition came up for consideration before this Court on 11.02.2026, this Court directed the Standing Counsel to get instruction whether Ext.P9 is an order passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

3. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that, Ext.P7 was issued after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. But, the Standing Counsel fairly submitted that, Ext.P9 is an order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. If that is the case, without going through the merits of the case, there can be a direction to reconsider Ext.P9, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. To facilitate the authority concerned to pass fresh orders, Ext.P9 can be set aside.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

i) Ext.P9 is set aside.

ii) The competent authority of respondents 1 to 3 will consider Ext.P8, and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

iii) Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken based on Ext.P7.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top