IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2009 / 9TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 14609 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- C.K. ABDUL REHMAN,S/O. KUNJAN PILLAI, CHERAVATTUKKAVU HOUSE, RAYONS PURAM P.O., PERUMNBAVOOR- 683 543. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY SRI.G.HARIKRISHNAN (TRIPUNITHURA) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, O/O. C.I. OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR. 2. ALI, S/O. PAREETH, CHERUPULLVEETTIL, KANJIRAKKAD KARA, PERUMBAVOOR. ADDL. RESPONDENT NO.3: THE PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY, O/o PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY, PERUMBAVOOR. (ADDL. RESPONDENT NO.3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 3062009 ON I.A. NO. 6732/2009). ADV. SRI.M.P.MOHAMMED ASLAM FOR R2 SRI.V.M.KURIAN FOR ADDL.R3 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) 14609/2009 APPEJDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF OTICE NO. A5/1084/2006 L.DIS. DATED 1.11.2006 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION. EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF SKETCH NO. 2081/2006 DATED 18.10.2006. EXT.P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF KYCHIT OBTAINED BY THE PETITIOER FOR SURRENDER OF 6.7 SQ.M. OF LAND IN BLOCK NO. 16 IN RE.SY. NO. 55. EXT.P3(a) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF KYCHIT OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FOR SURRENDER OF LAND I BLOCK NO. 16 IN RE.SY. NO. 56. EXT.P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF G.O. (RT) NO. 3351/2005/LSGD. EXT.P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF G.O(RT) NO. 3350/2005 /LSGD DATED 11.8.2005. EXT.P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER NO. 32249/G1/2005/LSGD ISSUED BY UNDER SECRETRY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT. EXT.P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.10.2007 IN APPEAL NO. 56/2007, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE NO. BA.88/06-07 ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY. EXT.P9 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.6.2008 IN W.P.(C) NO. 17306/2008, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P10 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.7.2008 TOGETHER WITH BUILDING PLAN AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. EXT.P11 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.11.2008 IN APPEAL NO. 426/2008, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P12 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REFERENCE/APPEAL PETITION BEFORE THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL DATED 22.12.2008. EXT.P13 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE AD PROVISIONAL ORDER DATED 30.3.2009 ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY. WP(C) 14609/2009 :2: EXT.P14 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE AND PROVISIONAL ORDER DATED 30.3.2009 ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY. EXT.P15 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF I.A. NO. 3051/2009 BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT (VACATIN CURT). EXT.P16 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXPARTE INTERIM ORDER DATED 23.4.2009 PASSED IN IA. NO 3051/2009, DISTRICT COURT (VACATION COURT), ERNAKULAM. EXT.P17 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN I.A. N. 3051/2009 BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT(VACATION COURT), ERNAKULAM. EXT.P18 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS DATED 29.4.2009. EXT.P19 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.5.2009 IN I.A. NO. 3051/2009 IN UNNUMBERED O.S NO. .../2009, DISTRICT COURT (VACATION COURT), ERNAKULAM. EXT.P20 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 17.4.2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXTP20(a) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 12.5.2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P20(b) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 21.5.2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P21 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT DATD 22.12.2008 EVIDENCING A RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT P12. EXT.P22 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO. 236/05-06 DATED 29.12.2005 TOGETHER WITH BUILDING PLAN. EXT.P23 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO. 167/05-06 DATED 8.11.2005 TOGETHER WITH APPROVED PLAN. EXT.P24 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO. 222/0506 DATED 8.11.2005 TOGETHER WITH BUILDING PLAN. EXT.P25 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO. 304/03-04 DATED 20.1.2004 TOGETHER WITH BUILDING PLAN. EXT.P26 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO. 341/05-06 DATED 8.6.2007. WP(C) 14609/2009 :3: EXT.P27 A LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE OWNERS OF PLOTS WHO CONSTRUCTED BUILDINGS ON THE STRENGTH OF EXHIBITS P4 TO P6 GOVERNMENT ORDERS WITHOUT LEAVING OUTSIDIE AND FRONT OPEN SPACE. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a)(1) PHOTOGRAPH EXT.R2(a)(2) PHOTOGRAPH EXT.E2(a)(3) PHOTOGRAPH EXT.R2(a)(4) PHOTOGRAPH EXT.R2(a)(5) PHOTOGRAPH EXT.R2(b) COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SECRETARY, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY DATED 20.3.2009. EXT.R2(c) COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CHIEF SENIOR TOWN PLANNER, KADAVANTHRA DATED 30.3.2009. EXT.R2(d) REPLY RECEIVED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FROM THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 8.4.2009. EXT.R2(e) REQUEST MADE BY THE SECRETARY PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR DATED 1.4.2009. EXT.R2(f) REQUEST MADE BY THE SECRETARY, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR, DATED 15.4.2009. EXT.R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 8.1.2009 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. EXT.R3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.1.2009 ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R3(c) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17.2.2009 ISSUED BY THE SENIOR TOWN PLANNER TO THE SECRETARY. // TRUE COPY // KNC/- P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) NO. 14609 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2009. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. This is a petition seeking police protection, directing the first respondent Circle Inspector of Police, Perumbavoor, to take immediate action on Ext.P20 series complaints and to provide effective and adequate police protection to the petitioner to ensurue that the second respondent does not take law into his own hands or physically obstruct the construction of the building in the petitioner's property. 2. Petitioner is constructing a building. It is half way through. His application for building permit along with the plan was considered and the Perumbavoor Municipality informed him by Ext.P8 certain modifications to be made in the plan so as to make the same in accordance with law. Petitioner thereafter submitted a revised plan for approval as per Ext.P10. According to him, in so far as Ext.P10 was not rejected to his knowledge he WP(C) 14609/2009 :2: made an appeal to the counsel as per ExtP12 and in the absence of any action taken in Ext.P12 according to him, there is a deemed permit granted in his favour. 3. A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the Municipality, however, refuting the allegations and averments . According to them, notice was issued to the petitioner by the appellate body on Ext.P12; but he did not appear. This, however, is disputed by the petitioner stating that the competent authority has not issued any notice. It is unnecessary for us to go into these rival contentions regarding the validity or otherwise of the notice for the limited purpose of disposing of this writ petition. So long as the petitioner is not possessed with a valid permit for construction, we decline to grant police protection. Be that it may, it is not in dispute that there is no positive action taken on Ext.P10. True that the Municipality is stated to have notified the petitioner that the Municipality was notified by the Town Planner that as against the Government Order in force, he has already moved the Government to cancel that order. That is not a good reason for not taking any decision on merits on Ext.P10. Municipality being a public authority governed by law, is bound to act in accordance WP(C) 14609/2009 :3: with the law in force. They cannot wait merely because somebody has moved for cancellation of the Government Order. A citizen has every right to put up his construction in accordance with law as is in force. Therefore, the Municipality is bound to consider Ext. P10 in accordance with the existing provisions of law including any government Order in force. Therefore, dehors Ext.R3(c) there will be a direction to the Municipality to consider Ext.P10 in accordance with the existing provisions including the Government Order in force, and to pass appropriate orders. 4. In this regard, there is a case for the petitioner that similarly situated 24 persons have been granted licence and in the case of the petitioner alone a discriminatory attitude is taken. Being a question of fact, it is not necessary for us to consider such contentions. It is open for the petitioner to take up such contentions before appropriate authority. Even though police protection is sought against the party Respondent No.2, in the light of the fact that at present Ext.P10 has not been favoured with a reply after due consideration, it is not necessary to give any direction to afford police protection, though it is trite law that nobody can take law in to his own hands. However, there will be a direction to the Municipality to WP(C) 14609/2009 :4: consider Ext.P10 and dispose of the same within a period of two weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is partly allowed. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. KNC/-