IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 31714 of 2009(H)
1. P.K.KAMMED KUTTY, PEZHUTHIYEDAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KOZHIKODE CORPORATION
... Respondent
2. SECRETARY,KOZHIKODE CORPORATION
3. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER
For Petitioner :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :02/09/2010
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-----------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.31714 of 2009
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who owns a parcel of land in Ward No.V of
Kozhikode Corporation, submitted an application under the Kerala
Municipality Building Rules, 1999 to put up a residential building in
that parcel of land. The said application was rejected by Ext.P3 order
dated 22.9.2009 on the ground that the land falls within the area
earmarked for residential purposes under the detailed town planning
scheme. It is contended that the reason given by the Secretary of the
Kozhikode Corporation to reject the application runs counter to the
principles laid down by this Court in Nazar v. Malappuram
Municiplity, 2009(3) KLT 92 and in the order passed in R.P.No.1073
of 2009 in that petition. Though respondents 1 and 2 have filed a
counter affidavit, it is evident from the stand taken by them that till
date steps have not been taken to notify the disputed land and the
lands situated in the neighbourhood under the Land Acquisition Act for
the purpose of the detailed town planning scheme referred to in
Ext.P3. In such circumstances I am of the opinion that the issue
raised in the instant writ petition is squarely covered in favour of the
petitioner by the decision of the learned single Judge of this Court in
Nazar v. Malappuram Municiplity (supra) as clarified in the order
W.P(C).No.31714 of 2009
: 2 :
in R.P.No.1073 of 2009 reported in Secretary to Government v.
Nazar, 2010(1) KLT 286. In that view of the matter it has to be
necessarily held that Ext.P2 order cannot be sustained.
In the result I allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P3 and direct the
Secretary, Kozhikode Corporation, to consider the application for
building permit submitted by the petitioner in the light of the relevant
rules and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously and in
any way within one month from the date on which the petitioner
produces a certified copy of the judgment before him. The petitioner
shall pay the fee, if any, prescribed under the relevant rules within the
time limit fixed by the Secretary of the Corporation.
P.N.RAVINDRAN,
Judge.
ahg.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
—————————
W.P(C).No.31714 of 2009
—————————-
JUDGMENT
2nd September, 2010