IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 28471 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOHAMMED ASHIK, PALAYATHAN MANZIL, VENNAKKARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, PALAKKAD. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, PALAKKAD. ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1` SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON FOR R1 SRI.JIBU P THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD FOR R1 SRI.C.A.ANOOP FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.28471/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. PHOTOCOPY OFO THE APPLICATION FOR GRANTING BUILDING PERMIT EXT.P2. PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.8.2009 / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.28471 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of a parcel of land situated within the local limits of Palakkad Municipality. With a view to put up a building in that parcel of land, petitioner applied for a building permit to the Secretary of the Palakkad Municipality. By Ext.P2 order dated 18.8.2009, the Secretary of Palakkad Municipality rejected the said application on the ground that the land belonging to the petitioner is covered by the Detailed Town Planning Scheme for Big Bazar area and is proposed to be acquired for commercial purposes. Ext.P2 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The Detailed Town Planning Scheme for Big Bazar area in Palakkad Municipality was notified by the Government way back in the year 1986. It is conceded at the Bar that till date, the Government or the local authority have not acquired even an inch of land for the said purpose. In such circumstances, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Raju S.Jethmalani and W.P(C).No.28471 of 2009 -:2:- others v. State of Maharashtra and others (2005 (11) SCC 222), the decision of the Palakkad Municipality rejecting the petitioner”s application for building permit cannot be sustained. In Raju.S.Jethmalani's case (Supra), the Apex Court held that though land belonging to private persons can be included in development plan, unless the land is promptly acquired by State Government or the Municipal Corporation to effectuate the said purpose, the landowner cannot be denied the right to use the property for any other purpose. I am therefore constrained to hold that Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. In the result, I allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P2 and direct the Secretary, Palakkad Municipality to reconsider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioner and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within six weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.28471 of 2009 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 24th November, 2010