IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 27442 of 2009(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S PRS HOSPITAL, KILIPPALAM, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, R. MURUGAN, S/O. LATE P. RAMASWAMY, AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT RAJKOT T.C. NO. 24/447, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SRI.HARISH GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CITY CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,CORPORATION BUILDING, MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. CHAIRMAN, STANDING COMMITTEE, MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, CITY CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD R2, R3 BY SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.27442 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed an appeal before the Council of the Trivandrum Corporation against a decision of the secretary of the Corporation touching the petitioner's request for extension of the period of a building permit. There is sufficient controversy between the parties as to whether the appeal is maintainable before the Council or whether the petitioner should have approached the Tribunal of Local Self Government Institutions. More importantly, the petitioner also points out that the appeal is against a decision of the secretary, curtailing the period for which the extension of the permit has been granted. Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing for the corporation points out that the matter is essentially the grant of an illegal permit. Whatever be the merits or demerits, the WPC.27442/09 Page numbers question of maintainability is also a matter on which the authority before which the appeal is filed, viz., the Council, can decide. Not only that, even if the petitioner has dual remedies available, if at all, under the law, it is for him to choose. Hence, leaving open all issues, including the question of maintainability, it is ordered that the Council will take up the appeal of the petitioner, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and decide on it within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.20/10.