IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31049 of 2011(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- JAYAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE, CHERTHALA LAW CHAMBERS,CHERTHALA, RESIDING AT PAIKKATTU HOUSE, KUTHIYATHODU, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.P.MADHAVAN SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN SRI.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695001. 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4. THE CHIEF URBAN AND TOWN PLANNER, DIRECTORATE OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. R1 BY SRI. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASGI R2 TO R4 BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K. MEERA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Manjula Chellur, Ag. C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 31049 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Manjula Chellur, Ag. C.J. Heard Mr.P.Madhavan, the learned counsel arguing for the petitioner herein. The reliefs sought in the present case read as under: “i) declare that the Acts governing the Kerala Town and Country planning and all development control rules and regulations framed thereunder as unconstitutional illegal, null and void abinitio and non-est in the eyes of law and ii) such other appropriate writ order or direction this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.” 2. The issue involved in this case was the subject matter of W.P.(C) No. 24526 of 2009 and W.P.(C) No.22857 of 2010, which came to be disposed of on 09.02.2011. 3. We note from the arguments of the learned counsel that State has gone in appeal challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 09.02.2011 and the appeal is pending consideration. When the matter came up for consideration before W.P.(C) No.31049 of 2011 -:2:- the learned Single Judge, the learned Single Judge has gone into several aspects and facets of the problem raised by the petitioner herein. 4. We are of the opinion that the petitioner herein can very well get impleaded as a party to the proceedings in W.A. No.1023 of 2011 so as to avoid not only multiplicity of proceedings but to have comprehensive litigation wherein all the issues could be sorted out. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Manjula Chellur, Ag. Chief Justice. P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge. ttb