Municipalities must act on illegal constructions adhering to established building rules, ensuring due process.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“(i) To issue a declaration that respondents 3 to 6 have no authority to conduct an illegal prayer hall at the building mentioned in Exhibit P5, without satisfying the mandate of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules .

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to take emergent action to stop forthwith the illegal functioning of the prayer hall and temple at the building mentioned in Exhibit P5, in the name of the 6th respondent.

(iii) To dispense with the English translation of vernacular documents.

(iv) To issue such other further reliefs as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.” (SIC)

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the illegal construction made by respondent Nos.3 to 6, styling it as a temple in a building, violating the provisions of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules . The petitioner submitted several representations before the Municipality, but there is no response is the grievance. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality.

4. The counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 6 submitted that, he want to get instruction from his clients. But, this writ petition is pending before this Court from 2024 onwards. Several chances were given to the party respondents to get instruction. I am of the considered opinion that this writ petition need not be retained here.

5. A statement is filed by the 2nd respondent.

It will be better to extract the relevant portion of the above statement:

“3. In this connection it is submitted that Sree Kaliyamman Devi Kshetra Paripalana Trust Presidents Sr. Palraj Guruswamy and Sekhar.V submitted an application for changing the occupancy to prayer hall of the building No. 8/278 and 8/277 situated in the property in Resurvey No. 7 of Block No. 41 of the Municipality on 8.2.202. The said application was considered and find that it is in violation of Rules 5, 26, 34, 50 and 79 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules . This was intimated to the applicants on 30.5.2023. But so far the same was not rectified.

4. The municipality had conducted an inspection on the premises based on the complaint of the petitioner and had found that alleged building are in the name of Subrahmanian, Palraj Guruswamy and Sekhar, on behalf of the Sree Kaliyamman Devishetra Paripalana Trust. The Municipality had sought explanation from the respondents 5 and 6 with regard to the functioning of prayer hall and so far no explanation was received and also they did not rectified the defects noted on the application for changing the occupancy to prayer hall or had given any reply to the letter issued by the Municipality on 30.5.2023. These facts are submitted for the kind consideration of this Hon'ble court for the proper disposal of the above case.”

In the light of the same, the Municipality has to take appropriate action in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the affected parties, forthwith.

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

1. The 2^nd respondent will do the needful, if there is any illegal construction on the part of respondent Nos. 3 to 6, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 3 to 6, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-