High Court Kerala High Court

Chavakkad Taluk Rural Housing vs The Secretary on 24 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Chavakkad Taluk Rural Housing vs The Secretary on 24 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18934 of 2008(D)


1. CHAVAKKAD TALUK RURAL HOUSING
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SECRETARY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE PRESIDENT

3. PAVARATTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :24/06/2008

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.


                  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                   W.P.(C) No. 18934 OF 2008 - D
                  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


                   Dated this the 24th June 2008


                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner submits that on the strength of a building permit

that was issued by the respondent Panchayat, they had commenced

construction of a multi-storied building. While so, by Ext. P3 the

building permit was temporarily cancelled and the petitioner was

called upon to appear for a personal hearing, by Ext. P5 notice.

Petitioner submits that in response to Ext.P5, petitioner appeared

before the Secretary and was heard on 28.1.2008 in the matter. It is

complained that despite the hearing that has taken place on

28.1.2008 and the convincing explanation that was furnished by

them, orders have not been passed. It is complaining of delay in

passing the orders as above the writ petition has been filed.

2. It is argued that in response to Ext. P5 petitioner appeared

and was heard by the Secretary on 28.1.2008. If it so it was

incumbent on the part of the Secretary to pass orders without delay.

W.P.(C) No. 18934 OF 2008

– 2 –

This is all the more so, for the reason that the permit that was

issued by the Panchayat has been temporarily cancelled and that

has led to a situation that the construction work remains

suspended. In view of this, I direct that the respondent Panchayat

shall pass orders in pursuance to Ext. P5 for which the petitioner

was heard on 28.1.2008. Orders as above shall be passed as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 weeks of production

of a copy of this judgment.

3. Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the

respondent Panchayat for compliance.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-