IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24371 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.RAYINKUTTY HAJI, KOTHRADAN HOUSE, MUNDUPARAMBU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT: ------------- THE MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALAPPURAM. BY S.C. MR. BABU S. NAIR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2008, ALONG WITH W.P.(C) No. 24257/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) Nos. 24371 & 24257OF 2008 - B = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. The applications filed by the petitioners in these cases for building permits were considered by the Municipality and by Ext. P2 they were rejected. The reason stated in Ext. P2 is that the area in question has been earmarked as an industrial area in the master plan. It is challenging Ext. P2, the writ petitions have been filed. 2. According to the petitioners, there are numerous residential houses in the area and that apart from making a master plan as stated in Ext. P2, the respondents have not taken any action in pursuance thereto. According to them, there is absolutely no justification to prevent construction of their houses in the area where there are several such residential and commercial buildings. Learned counsel for the petitioners also refers to Ext. P3 judgment rendered by this Court dealing with identical cases where relief has W.P.(C) Nos. 24371 & 24257 OF 2008 -2- been granted. 3. In fact, Ext. P3 is a judgment concerning the respondent Municipality itself. In Ext. P3 judgment, following earlier judgments relief was granted in an identically situated case. In view of the law laid down by this Court the aforesaid judgments I quash Ext. P2 and direct the respondent Municipality to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners without being influenced in any manner by the master plan mentioned in Ext. P2. Orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 4. It is also directed that the petitioners shall file an undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the Secretary of the Municipality stating unconditionally that in the event of any notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act being promulgated for the acquisition of any portion of the property in question within one year from today, the petitioners will not claim any compensation for the construction which may be put up by them on the strength of the permit to be issued to them pursuant to Ext. P2 application. It is clarified that it is always open to the W.P.(C) Nos. 24371 & 24257 OF 2008 -3- respondents to acquire the properties for any genuine public purpose invoking the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Writ petitions are disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-