IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 14488 of 2008(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- T.S.RAMAKRISHNAN,"GOKUL" PUSHPAGIRI, VILLAGE ROAD,PUNKUNNAM,THRISSUR, REP.BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER V.KALYANA KRISHNAN,T.C.2.217,"GOKUL", PUSHPAGIRI VILLAGE ROAD,PUNKUNNAM,THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR, ADV. SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, THRISSUR,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS , SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION, ADV. SRI.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.14488/2008-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SANCTION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 18/05/1983. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REVISED BUILDING PERMIT NO:PW8/BA/473/04-05 DTD. 11/01/2005. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE NO:G1-2089/2005 DTD. 22/03/2005. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 10/01/2008. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER PW8/BA/473/04-05 DTD. 29/01/2008. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 28/04/2008. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION DTD. 28/04/2008. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 29/04/2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 14488 OF 2008 - Y = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th June 2008 J U D G M E N T Ext. P8 order rendered by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in I.A. No. 415 of 2008, is under challenge. 2. Petitioner submits that he has constructed an apartment complex based on Ext. P2 permit that was issued by the respondent Corporation. It is stated by the petitioner that on completion of the construction, petitioner applied for the issue of an occupancy certificate. That was rejected by the respondent Corporation by Ext. P5 order. Challenging Ext. P5, petitioner filed Ext. P6 appeal before the Tribunal along with Ext. P7, an application for condoning delay of 60 days in filing the appeal. The petition for condonation of delay was numbered as I.A. No. 415/08 and that was rejected by Ext. P8 order of the Tribunal which is sought to be challenged in this writ petition. 3. The reason for rejection of the petition for condonation of delay is that the power of the Tribunal to condone delay is limited W.P.(C) No. 14488 OF 2008 -2- to one month only and since the period of delay exceeded 30 days, the application was rejected. 4. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. In Ext. P7 application for condonation of delay and in the writ petition, the petitioner has given convincing reasons for the delay that has occurred in filing the appeal. Even otherwise rejection of the application for occupancy certificate may even lead to the demolition of the building and therefore unless there are valid reasons the petitioner could not have delayed filing of the appeal. On the whole I am satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal needs to be condoned and that the Tribunal shall entertain Ext. P6 appeal and consider the same on merits. W.P.(C) No. 14488 OF 2008 -3- 5. Accordingly, quashing Ext. P8 this writ petition is disposed of directing that the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions shall number Ext. P6 appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext. P5 order of the 3rd respondent, consider the same on merits with notice to the petitioner and pass orders thereon. It is directed that until the disposal of the appeal as above, the interim order passed by this Court on13.5.2008 will continue in force. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Tribunal for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-