IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 21ST MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3914 of 2010(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- LEKSHMI.C, W/O.RATHISH,V.A, AGED 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.21/1419 B, VELLEZHATH HOUSE, PALLURUTHY PO, KOCHI-6. BY ADV. SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY SRI.ANIL GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KOCHI CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEEER, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, ERNAKULAM. MR.S.RAMESHBABU, SC FOR CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NOS. 3915 & 3916 OF 2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) Nos.3914, 3915 & 3916 of 2010 (L) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners submit that they had obtained building permit from the Municipality for construction of residential buildings. According to them, in terms of the building permits, they completed construction and thereafter applied for occupancy certificate. It is stated that the applications for occupancy certificate in terms of Rule 22 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules were submitted by them on 10/12/2009. Complaint of the petitioners is that despite having made the applications, occupancy certificates have not been issued so far. 2. They are relying on Sub Rule (3) of Rule 22 to contend that on receipt of the application and on being satisfied that the construction has been carried out in conformity with the permit given, the Secretary shall issue occupancy certificate not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of the completion certificate. The proviso to this Sub Rule states that if no such occupancy certificate WP(C) Nos.3914, 3915 & 3916/2010 -2- is issued within the said 15 days, the owner may proceed as if such occupancy certificate has been duly issued to him. 3. According to the petitioners, they having submitted the applications as early as on 10/12/2009 the time limit of 15 days has expired long ago, and therefore they are entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Rule 22(3). It is stated that on the basis of the proviso, unless the buildings are assigned numbers, they will not be in a position to apply for electricity and water connections. It is in these circumstances, these writ petitions have been filed. 4. I heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents also. 5. If as stated by the petitioners, applications, complete in all respects, have been made by them as early as on 10/12/2009 and the constructions made by them is in compliance with the conditions of the building permits issued, the Secretary ought to have discharged his obligation as provided under Rule 22(3) referred to above. If he has not done so, necessarily, the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of the proviso to Rule 22(3). 6. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of directing WP(C) Nos.3914, 3915 & 3916/2010 -3- that if the applications made by the petitioners are complete in all respects and the constructions are in compliance with the permits, the Secretary shall issue the occupancy certificates within seven days of production of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Secretary of the Corporation for compliance. These writ petitions are disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg