IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 19651 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- GOPAKUMAR B.NAIR BUILDER AND PROMOTER, SERENE PARK, GBN SPACES, P.B.NO.5710, HOTEL SILVER SAND COMPLEX, TRIVANDRUM -36. BY MR.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE, MR.D.KISHORE. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM 2. THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, OFFICE OF THE CTP, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE REGIONAL TOWN PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING OFFICE, NEAR AKG CENTRE, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. 4. CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILIDING, PALAYAM TRIVANDRUM. 5. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SUDHADEVI R4 & R5 BY MR.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE MR.P.K.MANOJKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/03/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.19651/2008 M APPENDIX EXT.P1: COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.144/07/LSGD DTD. 31/05/2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.8911/RD2/08/LSGD DTD.6/2/2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO.4160/2008(T). EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D.436/2008 DTD. 13/05/2008 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D/436/08 DTD. 13/06/08 INFORMED THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE G.O.MS.261/76/LA & SWB DTD. 27TH OCTOBER, 1976 NOTIFYING THE MEDICAL COLLEGE AREA DEVELOPMENT SCHEME. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 23/09/2008 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 25/02/2007 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE INFORMATION DTD. 23/03/2007 GIVE BY PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss V.GIRI, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.19651 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd March, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the developer of an extent of land of Kadakampally Village, part of the Kadakampally Panchayat which later become part of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation area. The said extent of land, according to the petitioner, was divided into 18 plots and the same has been assigned in favour of 18 different persons. The petitioner wanted to develop the land and therefore, on behalf of the 18 holders of the land, approached the Corporation for construction of individual units in the said land. The Town Planner, Government of Kerala, by Exhibit P5 declined permission, on the ground that the land in question is included as a Greenstrip Zone under a detailed Town Planning Scheme applicable to the area in question called the Thiruvananthapuram Medical College Area Development Scheme. The scheme was approved as per an order of the Government No.G.O(MS261/76/LA & SWB) dated 27.10.1976, issued under Section 4 of the Travancore Town and Country Planning Act 1120 (ME). The petitioner contends WP(C).19651/08 2 that Exhibit P6 scheme has been varied by subsequent General Town Planning Scheme for Trivandrum issued under Section 12 of the Town Planning Act, 1108 (ME). The General Town Planning Scheme for Trivandrum, originally brought into force with effect from 26.1.1971, has been subsequently varied as evidenced by Exhibit P1, it is contended. The gist of the contention raised by the petitioner is that since there is a General Town Planning Scheme for Trivandrum in force, an earlier detailed Town Planning Scheme for a small area would have yielded to the former. Several other contentions are taken in the Writ Petition. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Government as also by the Corporation. 2. I heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri.D.Kishore, the learned Government Pleader, Smt.Sudha Devi and the Senior Counsel appearing for the Trivandrum Corporation, Sri.Nandakumara Menon. Sri.Nandakumara Menon points out that Exhibit P5 is appealable before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. I heard learned Counsel for the petitioner on this aspect. WP(C).19651/08 3 3. Though contentions have been taken up in the Writ Petition as to the continued application of Exhibit P6 and as to whether Exhibit P1 supersedes Exhibit P6, I am not inclined to consider the said contention on merits at this stage, since the question of application of Exhibits P6 and P1 are matters which can be effectively adjudicated upon by a fact finding body like the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, where it will always be open to the petitioner to demonstrate that his application is eligible to be considered under the provisions of the General Town Planning Scheme for Trivandrum brought into force in 2007. 4. Thus the petitioner is relegated to the alternative remedy available in relation to Exhibit P5. The other contentions are left open. If the petitioner files an appeal against Exhibit P5 within four weeks from today, the Tribunal shall treat the appeal as presented within the time and proceed to dispose of the same on merits, after hearing the Corporation as also the Government. I make it clear that the Tribunal shall go by the statutory provisions and scheme having the force of law. The Tribunal's decision shall not be WP(C).19651/08 4 influenced by any circulars issued by the Government which have no statutory force. The Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of presentation of the appeal. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, JUDGE vgs.