Abdul Karaim and Ravikumar Pillai vs The Corporatoin of Thiruvananthapuram

P.N. Ravindran, J.—Ext. P3, styled as a notice, issued under Rule 16(1) of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, is under challenge in this writ petition.

The main contention raised by the petitioners is that the jurisdictional factors which are required for issuing a notice under Rule 16 of the said rules do not exist and that the notice also does not set out the ground on which action under Rule 16 has been initiated.

The pleadings disclose that the petitioners have filed Ext.P4 reply to Ext.P3 show cause notice. In my opinion, if the petitioners have a grievance that there is no factual foundation for initiating action under Rule 16, it is for them to bring it to the notice of the Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, who has issued Ext.P3 notice and to challenge the final order, if any, passed by the Secretary, in other appropriate proceedings. It will be premature for this Court to go into the question as to whether any grounds exist to proceed against the petitioners under Rule 16 at this stage.

In such circumstances, leaving open the petitioners'' contentions, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Secretary, Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram, to pass final orders in the matter, after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard, expeditiously and in any event, within two months from the date on which petitioners produce or the Secretary otherwise receives a certified copy of this judgment. It will be open to the petitioners to supplement Ext.P4 by filing an additional representation before the Secretary of the Corporation, who shall pass an order giving reasons in support of his conclusions and findings, after adverting to the various contentions raised by the petitioners and shall, after orders passed, communicate a copy thereof to them.