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 THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 2409 of 2008 ----------------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.35706/08 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT) .............. APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- UMA RAJEEV, W/O. RAJEEV GOPAL, "KHIRASH" TC 41/357 (OLD) 59/05 (NEW) MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.), SRI.S.SUJIN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. SPECIAL SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION & SOCIAL WELFARE (G) DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 3. CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING OFFICE, KOTTARATHIL BUILDINGS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1, R3 & R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. MEERA, R2 & R4 BY ADVS. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.), SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. J.B. Koshy,Ag.C.J. & V. Giri, J. ---------------------------------------- W.A. No. 2409 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 Judgment Koshy, Ag.C.J. Appellant/Petitioner challenged Ext.P4 order of the fourth respondent whereby petitioner's application for building permit was rejected on the ground that the property in question is included in the Medical College Development Scheme. The learned single Judge declined to entertain the writ petition as there is alternate remedy by way of appeal as provided under the Kerala Municipality Act. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the Medical College Development Scheme is already lapsed and various other contentions were also submitted. In a similar matter, a single Judge of this court quashed a similar order, but subject to various conditions, by Ext.P3 judgment. That has become final. Therefore, we also dispose of this appeal with the directions as contained in Ext.P3 which are as follows: “Ext.P2 is quashed and the respondent Corporation is directed to pass fresh orders on the building permit application submitted by the petitioners favourably if the plan is otherwise in order on condition that the petitioners submit an W.A. No.2409/2008 2 undertaking in the form of an affidavit stating clearly that if a notification under section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act is promulgated within one year of issuance of the building permit, the petitioners will surrender the property including the building constructed without claiming any compensation for the building. It is made clear that even thereafter if the Corporation or the Government wants to acquire the property for any genuine public purpose, this judgment will not stand in the way of doing so and under such an event the respondents will give adequate compensation to the petitioners. Fresh orders on the building permit application will be passed by the respondent Corporation at their earliest and at any rate within three weeks of receiving a copy of this judgment.” J.B.Koshy Acting Chief Justice V. Giri Judge vaa