• News
  • City News
  • kochi News
  • Chander Kunj residents file contempt plea in HC over noncompliance of order on buy-back option

Chander Kunj residents file contempt plea in HC over noncompliance of order on buy-back option

Chander Kunj residents file contempt plea in HC over noncompliance of order on buy-back option
Kochi: A contempt of court petition has been filed in high court against the managing director of Army Welfare Housing Organisation (AWHO) for allegedly failing to comply with a court order regarding the buy-back option for residents of Chander Kunj Army Towers at Vyttila in Ernakulam, which was ordered to be demolished and reconstructed. The bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while considering the petition filed by M R Radhakrishnan Nair and his wife Sreelekha Nair, both residents of the Army Towers, sought instructions from the Ernakulam district collector on whether the committee directed to be constituted by HC had taken any decision on the buy-back option. HC also issued notice to the respondents, including Major general Vikal Sahni (Retd), the AWHO MD. The matter has been posted for March 12.
Kochi: HC Halts Political Survey, Infrastructure Moves, Court Expansion & More
HC had in Feb 2025, issued an order directing the demolition and reconstruction of Towers B and C of Chander Kunj, taking into consideration their dilapidated condition. The district collector was also directed to constitute a committee for the same. Later, upon noting that 82 out of 264 allottees had expressed interest in the buy-back scheme, HC authorised the committee headed by the collector to determine the amount to be offered for the buy-back.
However, the petitioners claimed that the AWHO MD, in violation of HC's directive, issued a communication to the residential welfare association stating that the buy-back offer is strictly between AWHO and the owners of the dwelling units of Towers B and C, and that no third-party intervention would be entertained. Additionally, the petitioners alleged that the MD arbitrarily fixed a lower amount for their buy-back claim and further stated that the offer was final and non-negotiable. They contended that the decisions taken by the MD, in violation of HC's order and by usurping the powers of the committee headed by the district collector, constitute a clear case of contempt.

End of Article
Follow Us On Social Media