IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 WA.No. 1740 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.38047/2007 Dated 27/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- M/S.HEERA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE(LIMITED), REP.BY A.R.NAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, HEERA PARK, M.P.AYYAPPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.ANIL THOMAS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY,Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J -------------------------------- W.A.1740/2008 ----------------------------- Dated this 14th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Koshy (Ag.C.J.) On the basis of the building permit issued from the Corporation and NOC from the Fire and Rescue Services Department, writ petitioner/Company constructed a multi storied building consisting a residential flats, in the heart of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. The permit was given in the year 2004. According to the petitioner, construction was in accordance with the permit conditions and completion report was duly accepted by the Corporation on 17.4.2006. Ext.P1 is the building permit granted by the Corporation. In terms of Rule 22(c) of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, occupancy certificate ought to have been given within 15 days. But the occupancy certificate was not granted on finding that it was built in a heritage zone. Permit was granted by a Special Committee. It is submitted that the order from the Arts and Heritage Commission was not obtained. It is also submitted that the officers did not point out to the Special Committee that this area was covered under the heritage scheme. W.A.1740/2008 2 Secretary, who was the Convener of the Special Committee, was absent in the meeting, which decided to recommend to grant the permit, and the Corporation itself granted permit. The building was constructed in the centre of Thiruvananthapuram city and the Corporation officials, on seeing the building constructed, did not take any action. Building was completed in the year 2006. About 28 families have already occupied the building. At this distance of time, after completion of the building, it is not reasonable on the part of the Corporation to say that the officers committed a mistake and therefore, Ext.P1 permit will be cancelled and building should be demolished. Building was not an unauthorised construction at all. It was constructed with permit. There was no misrepresentation of the fact or law. There is no allegation that the construction carried out, will be a threat to life or property. Rule 16 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, reads as follows:- Suspension and Revocation of permit - Secretary shall suspend or revoke any permit issued under these rules if it is satisfied that W.A.1740/2008 3 the permit was issued by mistake or that a patent error as crept in it or that the permit was happened to be issued on misrepresentation of fact or law or that the construction if carried out will be a threat to life or property.” 2. Negligence or mistake committed by the officers is not a ground for revocation of the permit already granted and acted upon by the parties. Counsel for the appellant also submitted that the appellant also will not be able to pay huge compensation to the writ petitioner, if the building is demolished We are of the view that the notice issued for cancellation of the permit is highly arbitrary and we fully agree with the findings of the learned Judge. Therefore, we are not reiterating the same. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, Acting Chief Justice V.GIRI, Judge mrcs