IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 8507 of 2010(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- NEW MILLENIUM KURIES PVT. LIMITED, MANNADIAR LANE, THRISSUR REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN,ADV. ROBSON PAUL, AGED 52 YEARS,S/O.LATE K.A.PAUL, KOLENCHERY HOUSE,ARANATTUKARA, THRISSUR 680 618. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THRISSUR CORPORATION,CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATIO FOR R1 SRI.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI A.J.VARGHESE FOR R-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.8507/10 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF TOWN PLANNING SCHEME NOTIFICATION DATED 28.4.08. EXT.P2: PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE IYE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P2(A): PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE IYE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P2(C): PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE IYE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION DATED 12.2.10 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 12.2.2010. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER DATED 4.3.2010. EXT.P4(A): TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P4(B): TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED PLAN FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION. TRUE COPY T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.8507 of 2010 K --------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF JULY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of 10 cents of land in Survey No.925/P of Chembukkavu Village in Thrissur Taluk. The property abuts the Ikkanda Warrier Road, which according to the petitioner is having a width of more than 12 metres. It is also submitted that it is a commercially important locality and the petitioner has produced Exhibits P2 to P2(b) photographs to show the various types of buildings which have come up in the area. 2. As per the master plan for the Thrissur Town and the Detailed Town Planning Scheme, there is provision for an inner ring road. Eastern portion of the inner ring road which passes through Ikkanda Warrier road is completed and the entire work is stated to be over. The petitioner, after submitting an application for issuance of building permit, had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.3861/2010, since there was undue delay in the matter. Therein the Corporation was directed to consider and pass orders on the application for building permit. Thereafter, by Exhibit P3, a communication was issued to the petitioner, which W.P.(C)No. 8507/10 -2- is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation and the learned Government Pleader. In Exhibit P3 the main objection taken is that the property in Survey No.925/P comes within the residential zone and therefore the construction of commercial building is not permissible. With regard to the requirements of Building Rules also, two objections have been stated in Exhibit P3. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the light of Exhibit P1 Government Order dated 3.5.2008, especially guideline No.(i),the petitioner is entitled for the said benefit. The learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitted that whether the petitioner is entitled for the said benefit can be ascertained only after verification of the details by the Secretary of the Corporation with the assistance of the Town Planner. It is also submitted that the petitioner will have to re-submit the materials including the plan, etc. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already re-submitted the same as per Exhibit P4; but the Corporation is not accepting the W.P.(C)No. 8507/10 -3- same. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following direction. 5. On production of the various details including Exhibit P4 by the petitioners, the 1st respondent will take appropriate action to conduct an inspection with the assistance of the Town Planner to find out whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of guideline No.(i) in Exhibit P1 Government Order. The said guideline is extracted below: “(i) Land to a depth of 75 meters in residential zone and 100 meters in Commercial, Public and Semi Public and Industrial zones along the sides of roads having an existing or proposed width of 12 meters or more uses permitted in Residential, Commercial and Public and Semi Public zones may also be permitted by the Secretary of the Local Self Government if such uses are not allowable otherwise in the zoning regulations. However such uses may not be permitted in residential zones if the surrounding area is substantially developed as a residential area.” 6. In the light of the above, Exhibit P3 is set aside. The matter will be reconsidered in the light of the above directions W.P.(C)No. 8507/10 -4- and appropriate communication will be issued to the petitioner after conducting due inspection within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn