IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WA.No. 2607 of 2009 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.24388/2009 Dated 14/09/2009 .................... APPELLANT/RESOPONDENT: ------------------------------ KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILDING, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KOZHIKODE CORPORATION RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS: -------------------------------- 1. P.ABDUL RASHID, S/O. PARAYIL MOHAMMEDKUTTY, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.EDARIKKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. P.SHAMIM, S/O. PARAYIL UNNEENKUTTY, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.EDARIKKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT (BOTH RESPONDENTS ARE REP.BY THEIR DULY AUTHORISED POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER N.HEMARAJ, AGED 61, S/O.N.GOVINDAN,'SANAM' KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE TALUK,P.O.PARAYANCHERI,KOZHIKOD BY ADV. SRI.RANJITH NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.2607 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.(C) No.24388 of 2009, the respondent in the writ petition has filed the present writ appeal. 2. The writ petitioner had challenged the rejection of building permit by the appellant herein on the ground that the land is earmarked for specific public purposes and that the location is in semi- residential area as per the Detailed Town Planning Scheme and as such permission cannot be granted. 3. Considering the fact that similar contentions were raised by the appellant Corporation in the writ petition filed by the predecessor of the present writ petitioner and this Court rejected the contentions of the appellant, the learned Single Judge deemed it proper not to entertain any of the fresh contentions raised. In our view, it is no more open to the appellant to contend otherwise than what is laid W.A.No.2607 of 2009. - 2 - down and observed between the very parties to the dispute and decided by this Court in Ext.P1 judgment. Moreover, the learned Judge has remanded the case to the Corporation for fresh consideration except the grounds raised for rejection in the present case. 4. As such, we find absolutely no merit in the contentions raised in the appeal and affirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we dismiss the writ appeal as devoid of merits. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns