IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2009 / 11TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17571 of 2009(N) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- MUSLIYAR MUHAMMED, AGED 50 YRS, S/O. ALAVI, NOORANGEL MUKKU, P.O. MELMURI, MALAPPURAM BY ADV. SRI.E.S.ASHRAF RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- THE MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARU, MALAPPURAM. ADV. SRI. N. ABDUL MAJEED, SC FOR MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.17571 of 2009-N = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT 1.The petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P1 whereby the respondent has refused to consider the building permit application of the petitioner on a ground referable to the existence of a master plan. The said master plan which applies to the territory of the first respondent fell for consideration of this Court in different writ petitions, including those which led to Exts.P3 and P4 judgments. I am satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to the relief since the existence of those master plans in the draft stage is insufficient to deny the building permit, more particularly when no land acquisition proceedings had proceeded on the basis of the master plan. 2.For the aforesaid reasons, Ext.P1 is quashed and WP(C)17571/09 -: 2 :- the respondent is directed to consider the building permit application of the petitioner and grant permit, if the application is otherwise in order, without reference to Ext.P1. Let that be done within one month from today. The writ petition is allowed as above. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/070709