IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4437 of 2009(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SAJI.P.THOMAS,FLAT NO.12 D, EXPRESS ESTATE APARTMENTS,KALOOR, P.O, COCHIN-682017. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,COCHIN-682011. 2. STATE OF KERALA,REP BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.RAMESH BABU SC, COCHIN CORPN. FOR R1 G.P. SHRI.K.V.MANOJ KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.4437 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 11th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order dated 25.9.2006 whereby the petitioner's application for a building permit has been rejected. I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition since the explanation furnished by the petitioner for the long delay of two years in challenging Ext.P5 is not at all convincing. The explanation offered by the petitioner is that the petitioner knew about the reasons for rejecting the application for building permit only now. Whether the petitioner knew the reasons or not, the same cannot stand in the way of challenging Ext.P5 within a reasonable time and in fact the non- disclosure of reasons would have been a ground for such challenge. Therefore, the same is not an acceptable explanation for not challenging Ext.P5 immediately after it has been received. In the above circumstances, the delay and laches in challenging Ext.P5 remains unexplained. Therefore, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2