IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 37543 of 2007(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- MARIYAMMA THAMPI, W/O.K.ANTONY THAMPI, NELLICKAL HOUSE, ERUMAMUNDA, CHUNGATHARA, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.JALEEL, ADV. SRI.K.THAVAMANI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY, PERUMBAVOOR. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY, PERUMBAVOOR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR, ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN, SC, SMT.K.A.ANGEL TREENA, ADV.COMMISSIONER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2008, ALONG WITH W.P.(C). 3639/2008 AND CONNECTED CASES,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.37543/2007-T: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD. 12/04/06. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE R.2. DTD. 19/11/2006. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R.1. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE DETAILS OF BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED TO SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS LIKE PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C). NO. 16783/2007 DTD. 31/10/2007 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).NOs.37543, 37544, 37573 OF 2007 & 3619, 3624, 3639, 3640, 3642 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT Advocate Commissioners appointed by this court have filed their reports. These reports are to the effect that as claimed by the petitioners, the properties upon which they proposed to construct buildings are dry lands and not wet lands. I am of the view that the fact situation is comparable to that which obtained in Ext.P6 judgment i.e. judgment in W.P.(C)No.16783/07. Concededly there is no approved and notified town planning scheme for the Perumbavoor Municipal area. The scheme is only under process of approval by the Government. Approval has not been granted and notification has not been issued so far. The plot which was the subject matter of Ext.P6 judgment is situated very near to the plots which are the subject matters of all these writ petitions and all these plots were originally part of a common holding. All the writ petitioners are small holders and all of them want to put up residential houses for occupation for themselves W.P.(c).NOs.37543, 37544, 37573 OF 2007 & 3619, 3624, 3639, 3640, 3642 OF 2008 2 and their families. More over it is also noticed that the Municipality has already issued building permits to persons who own portions of the very same holding. Under these circumstances, I am inclined to allow these writ petitions. Ext.P4 in all these writ petitions are quashed and the Municipality is directed to grant approval to the plans submitted by the petitioners and to issue building permits if the plans are otherwise in order. In other words, existence of the so called master plan and description of the property as paddy fields in the basic revenue records the title documents or in the master plan will not be a ground for rejection of the plans. Fresh orders as directed above shall be passed by the Municipality on the plans submitted by the petitioners at the earliest and at any rate within one month of receiving a copy of this judgment. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. W.P.(c).NOs.37543, 37544, 37573 OF 2007 & 3619, 3624, 3639, 3640, 3642 OF 2008 2