IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 17090 of 2008(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- C.P.MUMTAZ, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.MAJEED, NAFEESA MANZIL, CHIRAKKARA P.O, THALASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF, SMT.MIJI JOHN, SRI.A.MUHAMMED HASHIM. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THALASSERY MUNIVIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THALASSERY. 2. SECRETARY, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, THALASSERY. 3. MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, THALASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17090/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard both sides. Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P1, an order passed by the respondent Municipality rejecting an application made by the petitioner for a building permit on the ground of pendency of a Town Planning Scheme. Counsel for the petitioner refers to Ext.P4, a judgment rendered by this court in WP(c).No.9658/2008, concerning the very same Municipality, wherein following the earlier Division Bench judgments and also the Apex court judgment, referred to therein, relief has been granted. In view of this, I see no justification to decline the relief to the petitioner. Therefore, I quash Ext.P1 and direct the Municipality to WP(c).No.17090/2008 2 pass fresh orders regarding granting of approval to the plan submitted by the petitioner and issuing building permit on the basis of such approval, provided the petitioner comply with the following conditions. Petitioner will furnish an undertaking before the Municipality in the form of an affidavit 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 petitioner's property for the Town Planning Scheme or for any other public purpose, within one year of the date of the undertaking the petitioner will not claim any compensation for the building, which may be put up by him on the strength of the permit to be issued to him pursuant to this judgment. In other words, existence of the development plan and any proposal to acquire the property will not be a ground for rejecting the plan. If the plan is otherwise in order, the plan will be approved. WP(c).No.17090/2008 3 Writ Petition is disposed of as above. vi ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE WP(c).No.17090/2008 4