Ramachandra Menon, J.
1. Heard both sides.
2. This writ appeal is directed against the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.7997/2014. Learned counsel for the appellant points out that the first respondent does not have any locus standi to raise objection to the construction being effected by the appellant as to his residence and that the entire rights and interests of the father of the first respondent (who is the brother of the appellant) over the property has already been conveyed to the appellant vide Ext.R2(e). It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant does have the permit/licence to effect the construction. Though the first respondent approached the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions by filing an appeal challenging the permit/licence, the same was dismissed. Assailing the legality and correctness of the order, W.P.(C)No.7997/2014 was filed before this Court.
3. On 26.3.2014, the learned Single Judge passed an interim order to the effect that, the appellant should not effect construction based on Ext.P8 permit for a period of two weeks. When the matter came up on 7.4.2014, the interim order came to be extended by two months, which gave rise to this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the matter requires to be heard in detail.
5. After hearing both sides, this Court finds that the appellant is having the necessary licence to effect the construction, as sanctioned by the second respondent Municipality, who has filed Ext.R2(j) report, stating that there is absolutely no illegality, deviation or irregularity in the construction. It is also seen that, the challenge raised by the first respondent before the Tribunal against the licence has become unsuccessful, pursuant to the dismissal of the proceedings, the correctness of which is now under challenge in the writ petition.
6. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is ready to abide by any condition that could be imposed by this Court and that the appellant has to complete the construction before the onset of monsoon, based on the permit issued by the local authority, we feel that the interim order requires to be modified. The interim order is accordingly modified to the effect that, the appellant can proceed with the construction, which shall be at the risk and cost of the appellant, in terms of the permit and subject to the result of the writ petition which is pending before the learned single Judge. It is made clear that, we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. It is open to the parties to take steps to get the writ petition posted immediately after re-opening.
Writ appeal is disposed of accordingly.
P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge.
K.Abraham Mathew, Judge.
sl.