IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 W.P.(C).No. 20888 of 2008(J) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- V. PARAMESWARAN, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O. LATE R. VASU IYER, SIVASAKTHI, THOTTAKATTU LANE, CHAKKAMUKKU P.O., PUNKUNNAM, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 002, MANAGING PARTNER, ARDRA ASSOCIATES, CAPITAL TOWERS, PATTURAKKAL, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, THRISSUR. 3. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, THRISSUR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K.R. DEEPA ADV. SRI. K.B. MOHANDAS, SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ==================== W.P.(C) NO. 20888 OF 2008 - J ==================== Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that a partnership firm of which he is a partner was issued a building permit on 11th of February, 2004. The permit was for three floors and thereafter a revised permit was issued in August, 2004 for additional 4 more floors. It is stated that subsequently, a partial occupancy certificate was also granted to the petitioner in October, 2005. Still later in November, 2007, a notice was issued by the Municipality under Section 406(1) alleging that the petitioner had made construction deviating from the approved plan. Though the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 reply to the notice, Ext.P5 order was passed requiring him to dismantle certain portions of the construction that they had made. To Ext.P5 again the petitioner submitted Ext.P6 reply. According to him, there was no progress in the matter. While so, in June 2008, Ext.P7, a show cause notice calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the partial occupancy certificate issued in October 2005 shall not be cancelled was issued. It is stated that on receipt of Ext.P7, petitioner submitted Ext.P8 reply, mainly contending that all defects which led to the issuance of the WPC 20888/08 :2 : impugned proceedings have been cured. It is submitted that inspite of this, the Corporation has not finalised the proceedings and also has not issued a final occupancy certificate. It is with this grievance, the writ petition has been filed. 2. Petitioner submits that though construction of the entire structure based on the original building permit and the revised one has been completed in accordance with the approved plan, since occupancy certificate has not been issued, they are not in a position to get electricity and water connections. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner and also the standing counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the respondent Corporation. Proceedings initiated by the notices including Exts. P5 and P7 have not been finalised, according to the petitioner. It is the petitioner's case that to these notices they have submitted Exts.P6 and P8 replies also. In view of this, it is essential that the Corporation should conclude the proceedings if necessary, after conducting inspection also. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the corporation shall continue the proceedings initiated pursuant to Exts. P5 and P7 and consider the matter in the light of Exts. P6 and P8 replies WPC 20888/08 :3 : submitted by the petitioner. Before orders are passed, necessarily, the petitioner should also be given opportunity to make his representations in the matter. The Secretary shall pass final orders in the matter, as directed above, with notice to the petitioner and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 5. Once orders are passed as directed, the request of the petitioner for issuance of occupancy certificate will also be considered without delay and orders passed thereon. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Secretary of the Corporation for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp