IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2010 / 28TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1599 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SARALA RAVEENDRAN,W/O.LATE RAVEENDRAN, T.C.24/669.METTUKKADA,THYCAUD.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,CORPORATION OFFICE,PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY,CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM, CORPORATION OFFICE, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHPARAM. 3. INDUS TOWERS LTD,8TH FLOOR,VANKARATH TOWERS,B.H.BYEPASS,PALARIVATTOM,COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. SURENDRAN,TC 24/674(2),SHAN TOWERS, METTUKKADA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.,LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) FOR R1. MS.K.R.DEEPA, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.1599 of 2010 (Y) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's grievance is basically against Ext.P4 building permit granted by the Corporation in respect of the 3 rd respondent for erecting a telecommunication tower. It is stated that in view of Ext.P3 judgment, Ext.P4 permit could not have been granted without hearing the petitioner. 2. Be that as it may, it is seen that the petitioner has moved the Secretary of the respondent Corporation by filing Ext.P5, which according to the petitioner is invoking Rule 16 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999. The petitioner complains that the respondent Corporation has not taken any action on Ext.P5. 3. I heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation, who contended that the remedy available to the petitioner is to file an appeal to the Tribunal. 4. In any case, facts show that the petitioner has moved the Secretary of the Corporation by filing Ext.P5. If the Secretary WP(C) No.1599/2010 -2- satisfied that the grounds under Rule 16 are made out, it is up to the Secretary to take necessary action. Having regard to the pendency of Ext.P5, I dispose of this writ petition directing the Secretary of the Corporation to take, consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, with notice to respondents 3 & 4. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg