IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 16608 of 2008(B)
1. HAZEENA, W/O.AZAD, 4/18, NEDUNGODE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. CHITTUR THATHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF FIRE FORCE,
3. NARAYANANKUTTY, S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :12/06/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
= =W.P.(C) = = = = = = = = = = = =
No. 16608 OF 2008 B
= = =
Dated this the 12th June 2008
J U D G M E N T
Building permit has been granted to the petitioner for the
construction of the ground floor and the 1st floor. Subsequently, the
petitioner applied for permit to construct 2nd floor of the building
and Ext. P6 is the receipt of payment of the fee. It is also stated
that the petitioner had applied for Fire NOC and the application
made by the petitioner is still pending before the 1st respondent. In
Ext. P7 the 1st respondent has informed the petitioner that his
application for construction of the 2nd floor of the building will be
considered as and when the Fire NOC is received.
2. It is disclosed to the petitioner in Ext. P9 reply issued
under the Right to Information Act that it is in view of the pendency
of Ext. P2 suit filed by the petitioner against the 3rd respondent, that
the 1st respondent has not so far forwarded the application for Fire
NOC to the 2nd respondent for his consideration. Thus, while the 1st
respondent is declining to grant building permit for want of Fire
W.P.(C) No. 16608 OF 2008
-2-
NOC, he is also declining to forward the application to the 2nd
respondent for consideration. As a result of this, petitioner is not in
a position to commence construction of the 2nd floor of his building.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Ext. P2, the
plaint in O.S. No. 463/06 before the Munsiffs Court, Chittur and
contends that it is a suit filed by the petitioner against the 3rd
respondent for fixation of boundary and rightly points out that the
pendency of the suit before the Munsiffs Court has no relevance in
so far as his application for Fire NOC and building permit are
concerned.
4. I am inclined to agree with the counsel for the petitioner
that the pendency of the suit should not have stood in the way of
the 1st respondent forwarding the application made by the petitioner
for Fire NOC to the 2nd respondent for his consideration and
appropriate orders. This, the 1st respondent shall do as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 2 weeks of production
of a copy of this judgment.
5. Once orders are passed by the 2nd respondent on the
application for Fire NOC, in the light of the said order the
W.P.(C) No. 16608 OF 2008
-3-
petitioner’s application for building permit for constructing the 2nd
floor of the building will also be dealt with and orders passed
without delay.
6. Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before
respondents 1 and 2 for compliance.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-