IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / 27TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 17869 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MOHAMMED THAHA, S/O SAYED MOHAMMED RAWTHER, PANACHIMOOTTIL, THEKKUGOPURAM, KOTTAYM -1. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SECRETARY, KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTTAYM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (PWD) N.H. 220 DIVISION, KANJIRAPPALLY. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H. (R) DIVISION,MUVATTUPUZHA* 4. CHIEF ENGINEER (PWD) NATIONAL HIGHWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. *Address of R3 is corrected as per order dated 18.8.2008 in I.A.No.10605/2008 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Ext.P1. Photocopy of the Tax receipt No.1820381 dated 15.6.2004 sowing the payment of land case in the name of the petitioner. Ext.P2. True copy of receipt issued to the petitioner from Ist respondent on receipt of application for building permit. Ext.P3. Photocopy of the forwarding letter dated 20.5.2008 by which it is sought for the NOC of the 2nd respondent. Ext.P4. Photocopy of the order dated 18.10.2007 issued by the 5th respondent fixing building limit. Ext.P5. Photocopy of the order dated 6.2.2008 issued by the 4th respondent prohibiting the construction of the building lines within the limit of building line fixed. // true copy // P.A to Judge. ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17869/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT In this writ petition, the challenge is against Ext.P3, which is issued on the basis of Exts.P4 and P5. 2. The writ petitions containing similar grievance have already been disposed of by this court by judgment in Peer Mohammed V. Chirakandam Grama Panchayat(2008(3) KLT 300). In view of this, the writ petition is disposed of clarifying that the petitioner herein will also be entitled to the relief already granted in the judgment referred above and it will be open to the petitioner to move respondents 2 an 3 for identical reliefs. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 2