JUDGMENT : N. Nagaresh, J. The petitioner has taken on lease shop room No.S-79 from the 2 nd respondent-Greater Cochin Development Authority (GCDA) as per registered lease deed dated 28.07.2016. The petitioner is conducting a business of Travel and Tourism in the name and style 'M/s. Princy World Travels', in the shop room. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to declare that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of rent exemption granted under Ext.P5 issued by the Government of Kerala. 2. The petitioner states that on account of the Covid-19 pandemic, the entire State followed the lockdown orders and the life in Kerala came to a standstill during this time. The 1 st respondent issued Ext.P1 GO dated 29.06.2020 granting rent exemption to the lessees of Government owned building and permitted the Local Self Government Bodies and Development Authorities to grant rent exemption to their lessees for the period from 01.04.2020 to 31.05.2020. Subsequently, the Government issued Ext.P2 GO dated 19.05.2021 permitting similar rent exemption. Ext.P4 GO dated 30.09.2021 was then issued ordering that the rent of all leased out Government buildings is exempted for the period from 01.07.2021 to 31.12.2021. By Ext.P5 GO dated 06.10.2022, the Development Authorities were also exempted from levying rent for the period specified therein. 3. Based on Ext.P4, the 1 st respondent issued GO dated 06.10.2022 ordering that rent for the building leased out by Development Authorities for the period from June, 2021 to August, 2021 should be exempted fully and rent for the period from September to December, 2021 shall be levied at the rate of 50%. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2 nd respondent has not implemented Ext.P5 order holding that it will cause financial burden to the 2 nd respondent. 4. The petitioner states that the 2 nd respondent is not under any financial distress. The 2 nd respondent is under the control of the 1 st respondent and is bound to implement the Government Orders. The refusal of the 2 nd respondent to grant rent exemption pursuant to Ext.P5 is illegal and amounts to insubordination. As per the rent exemption granted under Ext.P5, the petitioner is entitled to rent waiver of Rs.2,87,561.42. 5. The 2 nd respondent entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The refusal of the 2 nd respondent to grant rent exemption pursuant to Ext.P5 is illegal and amounts to insubordination. As per the rent exemption granted under Ext.P5, the petitioner is entitled to rent waiver of Rs.2,87,561.42. 5. The 2 nd respondent entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the 2 nd respondent, it is submitted that Ext.P5 order was not complied with by the 2 nd respondent since compliance would have caused the 2 nd respondent a loss of Rs.5,02,65,154/- causing severe breakdown to its activities. The allottees of shop rooms under the 2 nd respondent were given exemption in rent during April to May, 2020 and May to June, 2021. The 2 nd respondent cannot grant more exemption as the same could mean a heavy financial breakdown. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the 2 nd respondent. I have also heard the learned Government Pleader representing the State of Kerala. 7. The petitioner is a bona fide tenant of the 2 nd respondent. The petitioner executed lease deed on 28.07.2016 for a period of ten years. Consequent to Covid-19 pandemic, the Government imposed lockdown. The 1 st respondent issued Ext.P1 GO dated 29.06.2020 permitting the Local Self Government Bodies as well as Development Authorities to grant rent exemption to the lessees of their buildings. Based on Ext.P1, rent exemption was granted by the 2 nd respondent to the petitioner and others from 01.04.2020 to 31.05.2020. 8. The Government thereafter issued Ext.P4 GO dated 30.09.2021 granting rent exemption to the lessees of Government owned buildings for the period from July, 2021 to 31.12.2021. The Government then issued Ext.P5 GO dated 06.10.2022 permitting the Development Authorities like the 2 nd respondent to grant 100% rent exemption for the period from June, 2021 to August, 2021 and 50% rent exemption from September, 2021 to December, 2021. The 2 nd respondent has not extended the benefit of Ext.P5 GO to the petitioner. 9. The defence of the 2 nd respondent is that grant of such rent exemption would cause heavy financial breakdown to the 2 nd respondent. As the orders of rent exemption were issued during a crucial pandemic period and perhaps exercising the powers under the Disaster Management Act, the 2 nd respondent cannot take a rigid stand refusing the benefit of Ext.P5 to the petitioner. 9. As the orders of rent exemption were issued during a crucial pandemic period and perhaps exercising the powers under the Disaster Management Act, the 2 nd respondent cannot take a rigid stand refusing the benefit of Ext.P5 to the petitioner. 9. Be that as it may, the 2 nd respondent has issued Ext.R2A letter dated 23.02.2023 to the 1 st respondent requesting to exempt the 2 nd respondent from implementation of Ext.P5 GO taking into consideration its financial position. According to the 2 nd respondent, the Government has not sent any reply to Ext.R2A communication. Considering the afore facts, I dispose of the writ petition directing that the amount of rent exemption to which the petitioner is entitled to under Ext.P5 shall not be recovered from the petitioner and no coercive proceeding in that regard shall be taken against the petitioner till the 1 st respondent communicates its decision on Ext.R2A request of the 2 nd respondent.