IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29920 of 2011(L) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- VIOM NET WORKS LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AT 5TH FLOOR, GOWRA TRINITY, CHIRAN FORT LANE, BEGUMPET, SECUNDERABAD-500 003 AND CIRCLE OFFICE AT J & CO CHAMBERS, MANIMALA ROAD, EDAPALLY, COCHIN-24 THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY(DEPUTY MANAGER-LEGAL), MR.M.SANTHOSH KUMAR. BY ADVS. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VATTIYURKAVU POLICE STATION, VATTIYURKAVU, TRIVANDRUM- 695013. 2. PADMAKUMAR, SREEJAYA, TC NO.VP 8/772-A, VRWA-A35, VAZHOTTUKONAM, TRIVANDRUM-695013. 3. BHUVANACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, NETTARA MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, VAZHOTTUKONAM, KODUNGANOOR P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695013. R1 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.M.K. ABOOBACKER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 29920/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 23/09/2011. P2: COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 22/09/2011 ISSUED BY TRIVANDRUM CORPORATION. P3: COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 02/11/2011. P4: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF EXT.P3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL,JJ. .................................................................... W.P.(C).NO.29920 OF 2011 ................................................................... Dated this the 16th day of November, 2011. JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J. It is submitted by senior Government Pleader Sri. M.K. Aboobacker that the third respondent has preferred an appeal to the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions against the permit on the strength of which, the petitioner prefers to construct a tower. It was also submitted that the permit has been stayed by the Tribunal. The correctness of the above submission is not disputed. In the above circumstances, we close the writ petition without considering the merits of the case. It is open to the petitioner to approach this Court once again once the proceedings before the Tribunal culminate in his favour. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. K. HARILAL, JUDGE. cl