IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7277 of 2010(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SAHADEVAN, S/O.NEELAKANTAN, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT SAJIN NIVAS, PERAYAM, UMAYANALLOOR P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.HARISH GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF KERALA, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, THAZHATHALA, KOLLAM. 4. THE SECRETARY, THRIKKOVILVATTOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, THRIKKOVILVATTOM, KOLLAM. BY GP K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).7277/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. Petitioner submits that he has purchased 15 cents of land in Survey No.390/10 of Thazhathala Village, where he wants to construct a hut, for which, according to him, he submitted Ext.P2 application for a permit, enclosing a plan. It is stated that by Ext.P2(a), the permit fee remitted by the petitioner has been acknowledged by the 4th respondent. Complaint is that orders granting building permit have not been passed. Hence the writ petition. 2. A perusal of Ext.P2 shows that it is only a representation and not an application in the proper form. Ext.P2, being only a representation, this Court will not be justified in requiring the Panchayat to consider the same. Be that as it may, if the petitioner owns the property as claimed by him, it will be open to the petitioner to make a proper application to the 4th W.P.(C).7277/10 2 respondent in which event the 4th respondent shall consider the same and pass orders thereon without any delay. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs