IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2008 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1930 W.P(C).No. 2604 of 2008 (I) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ---------- PAYANTAVIDA NASAR, S/O. PAYANTAVIDA KAMARUDDIN, NOORMAHAL, CHOKLI POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------ 1. THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY. 3. THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, THALASSERY, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY. 4. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY. BY ADV. SRI.I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 2604 OF 2008 I = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th May, 2008. J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext. P2 by which building permit has been declined on account of the alleged pendency of a proposal for development of a road. It is stated that if the proposal materialises a portion of the property in question will be necessitated for the said project of road widening. Petitioner contends that no notification has so far been issued under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and therefore the reason for rejection cannot be sustained. 2. Petitioner also makes reference to the judgment of this Court reported in Padmini v. State of Kerala {1999(3) KLT 465} and Ext. P4 judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 28206 of 2006 dealing with an identical issue. Reference to the aforesaid two judgments shows that the issue is clearly covered by those two judgments and that in the absence of a notification the rejection of the application for building permit cannot be sustained. In view of the above, I W.P.(C) No. 2604 of 2008 - 2 - quash Ext. P2 and direct that the application and Ext. P1 plan made by the petitioner shall be reconsidered in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 3. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the respondents for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-