Kerala High Court
Neonova Munnar Llp vs State Of Kerala on 17 April, 2026
W.A.No.923 of 2026 1
2026:KER:33010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1948
WA NO. 923 OF 2026
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED IN WP(C) NO.8498 OF 2026 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 NEONOVA MUNNAR LLP, CHITHIRAPURAM P.O. ANCHAL,
IDUKKI REPRESENTED BY IT'S DESIGNATED PARTNERS
PRAVEEN MOHAN, AGED 43, S/O. P.G. MOHANAN,
PULICKAMARIL HOUSE, THOKKUPARA P.O. THOKKUPARA,
PIN - 685565
2 P.C.JAYAN, AGED 56 YEARS
S/O. CHAKRAPANI, DESIGNATED PARTNERS
NEONOVA MUNNAR LLP, CHITHIRAPURAM P.O. ANCHAL,
IDUKKI RESIDING AT PATTANANIYIL HOUSE, SENGULAM
P.O. MUTHUVAANKUDY, PIN - 685565
BY ADV SMT.NISHA GEORGE
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
W.A.No.923 of 2026 2
2026:KER:33010
2 KERALA ADVENTURE TOURISM PROMOTION SOCIETY
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
IDUKKI, CIVIL STATION, PAINAVU P.O. KAYILIMALA
REPRESENTED BY IT'S CHAIRPERSON, PIN - 685603
4 DISTRICT COLLECTOR/CHAIRPERSON
DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY,
IDUKKI, CIVIL STATION, PAINAVU P.O.
KAYILIMALA, PIN - 685603
5 TAHSILDAR
OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,
DEVIKULAM, PIN - 685613
6 VILLAGE OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KUNJITHANNY,
ANACHAL, IDUKKI DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 685565
7 PALLIVASAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
SANGULAM POWER HOUSE MAIN ROAD, DEVIKULAM P.O.,
IDUKKI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY,
PIN - 685565
8 SECRETARY, PALLIVASAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
SANGULAM POWER HOUSE MAIN ROAD, DEVIKULAM P.O.,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685565
BY ADVS.SRI.K.M FAISAL- GP
SMT.SREELAKSHMI SABU -SC
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.923 of 2026 3
2026:KER:33010
GOPINATH P. & JOHNSON JOHN, JJ
---------------------------------------------------------------
W.A.No.923 of 2026
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of April, 2026
JUDGMENT
Gopinath P., J.
The appellants are the writ petitioners in WP(C) No.8498 of 2026. This
writ appeal has been filed challenging the interim order dated 10.04.2026,
through which and for the reasons stated therein, the learned Single Judge
refused interim relief. WP(C) No.8498 of 2026 has been filed challenging Ext.
P8 communication issued by the Deputy Collector on behalf of the District
Collector, Idukki, in his capacity as the Chairperson of the District Disaster
Management Authority, as also Ext. P16 communication issued by the District
Collector, Idukki (the 4th respondent) as the Chairperson of the District
Disaster Management Authority prohibiting the use of a glass bridge
constructed and operated by the petitioners at Anachal, Munnar for tourism-
related activities. A reading of Ext. P16 communication would show that the
District Collector, Idukki, as the Chairperson of the District Disaster
Management Authority, has directed the petitioners to stop the use of the
glass bridge, exercising his jurisdiction under the provisions of the Disaster
W.A.No.923 of 2026 4
2026:KER:33010
Management Act, 2005. A reading of Ext. P16 also indicates that, according to
the District Collector, the glass bridge was constructed without permission
from the Kerala Adventure Tourism Promotion Society, the 2nd respondent
herein. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned order dated 10.04.2026,
refused to grant an interim order staying Ext.P16, taking the view that since
the matter involves the safety of the public, the question of granting an interim
order staying the operation of Ext.P16 does not arise for consideration.
2. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, it is the
submission of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants that
after Ext.P16 was issued, by a subsequent communication dated 30.12.2025
(Ext.P24), a study was directed to be conducted regarding the safety of the
glass bridge and that such study has been conducted through the National
Institute of Technology, Calicut. It is also submitted that, taking into
consideration the report of the National Institute of Technology, Calicut, the 2nd
respondent herein has issued a communication bearing No.KATPS/70/2020
dated 16.04.2026, finding that the glass bridge constructed by the petitioners
is safe for use and can be opened to the public. This communication is not on
record in this writ appeal. However, a copy of the said communication has
been handed over to us across the bar by the learned Senior Counsel
W.A.No.923 of 2026 5
2026:KER:33010
appearing for the appellants.
4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 7 & 8
(Pallivasal Grama Panchayat) would submit that no permission had been
taken from respondents 7 & 8 for the construction of the glass bridge. It is
submitted that the matter has to be ultimately decided by the District Collector
as Ext.P16 is an order issued by the District Collector, Idukki, in his capacity
as the Chairperson of the District Disaster Management Authority constituted
under the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
5. The learned Government Pleader would also submit that the matter
has to be decided by the District Collector.
6. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
appellants, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6
and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 7 & 8 and in the
facts and circumstances noticed above, we are of the opinion that the learned
Single Judge was right in refusing the interim relief staying the operation of
Ext.P16 as any permission to use the glass bridge would involve issues of
public safety. However, we think that in the light of the subsequent
developments, including the communication dated 16.04.2026 issued by the
2nd respondent, it is only proper that the matter be considered by the 4 th
W.A.No.923 of 2026 6
2026:KER:33010
respondent, taking note of the subsequent developments and after affording
an opportunity of hearing to the appellants as also to respondents 2 & 8.
Accordingly, this writ appeal will stand disposed of directing that the
matter be considered by the 4th respondent, also taking note of the
communication dated 16.04.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent and after
affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants as also to respondents 2
& 8. The 4th respondent shall endeavour to pass fresh orders in the matter as
directed above, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of
one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
Sd/-
JOHNSON JOHN
JUDGE
sp