IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 16TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31250 of 2008(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SASIDHARAN.P, S/O.LATE POKKEN, PARENMAL HOUSE, MARUTHONKARA VILLAGE, ADUKATHU.P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. MALLIKA, D/O.LATE POKKEN, PARENMAL HOUSE MARUTHONKARA VILLAGE, ADAKATHU.P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. CHANDI, D/O.LATE POKKEN, PERENMAL HOUSE, MARUTHONKARA VILLAGE, ADUKATHU.PO, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ROAD SECTION, KUTTIADI. 3. KAVILUMPARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT,THOTTILPALAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNAN FOR R3 SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY FOR R3 GP SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.4733/2007 OF KAVILUMPARA SRO EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.4729/07 OF KAVILUMPARA SRO EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.4725/07 OF KAVILUMPARA SRO EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO 3RD RESPONDENT (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).31250/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 7th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners sought for a No Objection Certificate from the second respondent to construct a building in their property which is situated by the side of State Highways. Application submitted by the petitioners was returned as per Ext.P5. Thereafter, third respondent, Panchayat, informed the petitioners that their application for a building permit cannot be considered in view of Ext.P5. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the stand taken in Ext.P5 is unsustainable in the light of the judgment of this Court in Peer Mohammed v. Chirakandam Grama Panchayath (2008 (3) KLT 300). Paragraph 18 of the said judgment reads as follows:- “Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of quashing Exts.P4 and P7 and directing the 4th respondent to W.P.(C).31250/2008 2 reconsider the request of the 1st respondent for issuing No Objection Certificate and pass appropriate orders thereon, in the light of the findings herein above. Orders as above shall be passed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 3. I heard learned Government Pleader also. 4. In the result, Ext.P5 is quashed and the applications for NOC submitted by the petitioners shall be re-considered in the light of the observations contained in the judgment of this Court reported in (2008 (3) KLT 300). Revised orders shall be passed within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs