IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 23281 of 2011(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- JAYASREE CHAKKALAKKAL AVINISSERY PO, OLLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MS.LAKSHMI RAJAN RESPONDENT: --------------- KOLAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, MULAKUNNATHUKAVU PO, THRISSUR 680 581. ADV. MR.K.N.VINODKUMAR FOR R1 MS.P.LAKSHMY FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23281 of 2011(I) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: LETTER NO.A1-4356/11 DTD. 21.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: JUDGMENT DATED 7.9.2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.22338/2010. EXT.P3: JUDGMENT DTD. 26.5.2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.15214/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL .... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.23281 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed for a direction commanding the respondent to consider the petitioner's application for building permit without insisting for any lay out approval as contemplated in Ext.P1 communication and for other incidental reliefs. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the respondent to consider and pass orders on her application for building permit submitted on 11.7.2011. The petitioner submitted the application for constructing a residential building in 8.23 cents owned by her in survey No.34/3P of Puppoor Village. By Ext.P1 communication the respondent informed the petitioner that since the land in which the petitioner sought to construct a residential building forms part of a larger extent of land divided into small plots, any construction in the plot can be carried out only after “Layout Approval” by the District Town Planner in respect of internal roads/roads provided in the housing colony. It was further intimated that if the petitioner failed to produce the approved lay out, her application for building permit will be rejected. The petitioner produced copy ::2:: W.P.(C).No.23281 Of 2011 of the judgments in W.P.(C).Nos.22338 & 15214 of 2010 in similar identical cases which are marked as Exts.P2 & P3. 3. The respondent filed a counter affidavit denying the averments in the writ petition and prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Rule 5 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 which deals with the application for development permit. As per the Rule, every person other than a Central or State Government Department who intends to develop or redevelop any parcel of land shall apply in writing to the Secretary for issuance of a development permit. Here, in this case, the petitioner has no idea to develop the land for any purpose, but, the petitioner only intends to construct a residential building in the property. It is pointed out that no development activities is necessary for the purpose of constructing a residential building. It is true that the petitioner has purchased a piece of land from the person who has got a larger extent. For the purpose of making constructions in the entire land the owner of the larger extent may have to approach the Secretary for development permit if he intends to develop the ::3:: W.P.(C).No.23281 Of 2011 land by providing roads etc. Here, the petitioner purchased a plot of land from the person who was holding a larger extent. The petitioner has no intention to develop the land and in fact development is not necessary also. The petitioner intends to construct a residential building in the property as it stands and did not apply for a development permit since development of the plot is not necessary for the purpose of putting up his residential house. 5. In these circumstances, there is no justification for issuance of Ext.P1 communication directing the petitioner to submit an application for development permit. A similar view has been expressed in Exts.P2 & P3 judgments. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court direct the respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner for building permit without insisting for any lay out approval and issue building permit, if the application is otherwise in order, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-