IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 26136 of 2008(J)
1. MATTUMMAL BASHEER HUSSAIN, MATTUMMAL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER, MALAPPURAM.
3. THE MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED
4. THE DISTRICTL COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.
For Petitioner :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :29/08/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) 26136 of 2008
--------------------------------------------------------
Dated: AUGUST 29, 2008
JUDGMENT
Heard both sides.
2. Ext.P6 is the order under challenge. In relation
to a plot of land mentioned in Ext.P7, earlier the petitioner
had filed an application for a building permit and that was
rejected by Ext.P3 order dated 29.3.2005. Challenging this
order, petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court as
WP(C) 19869/2008. Considering the delay in challenging
Ext.P3, this Court dismissed that writ petition by Ext.P4
judgment, however, giving liberty to the petitioner to file a
fresh application. Accordingly the petitioner submitted
Ext.P5 plan and that is now rejected by Ext.P6 order dated
22.7.2008. The reason for rejection stated in Ext.P6 is the
pendency of a master plan and that the request is against
the terms of the same.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner invites my
WP(C) 26136/08
2
attention to Exts.P7 to P7(9) judgments rendered by this
Court in relation to the very same Municipality, whereby
relief has been granted.
4. The facts being identical to the cases decided by
this Court in Exts.P7 to P7(9), I see no justification to deny
the relief sought for. Accordingly Ext.P6 will stand set
aside and the Municipality shall reconsider Ext.P5
application without being influenced in any manner by the
master plan mentioned in Ext.P6. Orders shall be passed as
expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within four weeks
of production of a copy of this judgment.
5. It is also directed that the petitioner shall file an
undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the Secretary
of the Municipality stating unconditionally that in the event
of any notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act being promulgated for the acquisition of any
portion of the property in question within one year from
today, the petitioner will not claim any compensation for the
WP(C) 26136/08
3
construction which may be put up by him on the strength of
the permit to be issued to him pursuant to Ext.P2
application. It is clarified that it is always open to the
respondents to acquire the properties for any genuine
public purpose invoking the provisions of the Land
Acquisition Act.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
mt/-