IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 RP.No. 121 of 2008(M) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36243/2007 .................... PETITIONER: --------------------- SHRI.MUHAMMED ALI, S/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 47 YEARS, PALOLI HOUSE, THIRUVAMBADI, CALICUT DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. M/S.IDEA MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS LTD., SECOND FLOOR, MERCY ESTATE, RAVIPURAM COCHIN-15. 2. THE THIRUVAMBADY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. BY G.P. SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW (R1) THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- R.P. NO. 121 of 2008 in W.P.(C)1197/2008 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February , 2008 O R D E R The petitioner in W.P.(C) 36243/2007 seeks review of my judgment on various grounds. That judgment was passed after hearing all the parties and under that judgment, I had directed the Panchayat to submit a report which had been called for by the Revenue Divisional Officer and had directed the RDO to issue hearing notice to the parties, hear all the parties, conduct further enquiries and to pass final orders. I had noticed that energisation of the tower has been permitted as per the interim order dated 20.11.2007 passed in I.A. No.15209/2005 in W.P.(C) No.31192/2007. I had clarified that the very construction of the tower and the energisation permitted under the interim order in I.A.No.15209/2005 will be subject to the final order to be passed by the RDO. 2. Sri.T.G.Rajendran, the learned counsel for the Review Petitioner drew my attention to Rule 142 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules. The learned counsel submitted that once work of the tower is completed, it is the duty of the company as well as the R.P.121/2008 2 Engineer to submit before the Secretary a Completion Certificate in Form E & F along with the structural stability certificate and that there upon only the Secretary, on being satisfied with the work has been completed exactly in tune with the permit granted, issue use certificate as appendix H allowing numbering of the building. According to Sri.Rajendran, this court passed an interim order permitting energisation of the tower only because the true facts were not placed before this court by the first respondent company. As already indicated, the Writ Petitioner does not seek review of the interim order permitting the energisation of the tower. The Writ Petitioner seeks review of only final judgment in the Writ Petition. In other words, at the time when the judgment was delivered, the interim order permitting the energisation had become fait acomplie. May be there is some merit in the submissions of the leanred Counsel Sri.Rajendran that numbering and energisation even before use certificate in Appendix H had been issued was not proper. But at the same time, the fact remains that the first respondent company and the engineer had submitted completion certificate in Form E & F respectively and it was for the Secretary of the Panchayat to verify whether the construction was in tune with the permit granted. Whatever that be, I am not persuaded to review the judgment on the R.P.121/2008 3 reason that the permission to energise the tower even before the Completion Certificate in Appendix H was issued and Door number was assigned is wrong. I dismiss the Review Petition. However, I permit the petitioner to represent before the Secretary of the Panchayat that the tower has not been constructed in tune with the draft plan and the permit granted. If any such representation/complaint is received by the Secretary, the Secretary will take a decision on that complaint with notice to the petitioner and the first respondent. It is open to the petitioner to file complaint if any within 10 days from today. If such a complaint is filed, decision on the question of issuing use certificate will be taken by the Secretary along with the decision to be taken on the complaint. Whether or not complaint is filed by the petitioner, decision will be taken by the Secretary on the question of issuing use certificate within three weeks of receiving a copy of this order. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. dpk R.P.121/2008 4