IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 16219 of 2007(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M.DHANAPALAN, S/O.M.P.RAGHAVAN, AGED 56, MOORKOTH HOUSE, P.O.CHALAD, PALLIKUNNU, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.H.BADARUDDIN SRI.C.A.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, MATTUL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O.MATTUL, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.C.KRISHNAN(KANNUR) FOR R1 SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR FOR R1 SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA FOR R1 SRI.SUDHEESH THAROL FOR R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.16219/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE (ORIGINAL) COMPLETION PLAN OF BUILDING NO.M.P.. 194 ISSUED FROM THE MATTUL PANCHAYATH. P2:- COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT OF THE BUILDING NO.M.P.. 194 FOR THE YEAR 06-07. P3:- COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTED TO THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(a):- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY R1 TO THE ILLAGE OFFICER MATTOOL. DT. 15.5.07. R1(b):- COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY E.P. SUDHAKARAN TO THE IST RESPONDENT DT. 15.5.07. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16219 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 26th November, 2008. J U D G M E N T The prayer is for a direction to the Panchayat to take a decision on Ext.P3 in the matter of approval of building plan. It is seen from the counter affidavit filed by the Panchayat that there is a dispute with regard to the boundary between the petitioner and his neighbour Sri.E.P.Sudhakaran, who is not a party to the writ petition. Unless it is shown that the building is sought to be constructed only in the undisputed area, the building plan cannot be approved. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to approach the first respondent, in which case, the matter will be duly considered by the said respondent in the light of the observations made in this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16219 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 26th November, 2008.