IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28063 of 2011(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- G.SANTHAMMA PILLAI W/O.LATE K.SANKARAN NAIR,AGED 73 YEARS, ''SOWPARNIKA',28/973 CHERUPARAMBATH ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, COCHIN-682 020 BY SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV.SRI.S.SUJIN SMT.NITA.N.S. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. A.C.XAVIER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S.CITY PROJECT PVT LTD, SANA COMPLEX M.V.PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-682 025 2. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILDING, COCHIN-682 031 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, EAST ZONAL OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN VYTTILA, COCHIN-682 019 R1 BY ADV.SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN SMT.S.JAYASREE R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.M.A.KALAM,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.28063/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.540/1976 OF SRO, ERNAKULAM SOUTH, IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND M EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SHRI.DINESH KUMAR ON 19-05-2008 BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT CORPORATION. EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT GRANTED BY THE COPORATION ON 2.04.2009 TO SHRI.DINESH KUMAR. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE FIRE RESCUE SERVICES ON 22.07.2008 TO SHRI.DINESH KUMAR. EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE CLARIFICATION ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT ON 3/07/2007 EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION RAISED BY THE PETITIONER ON 18/10/2011 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.28063 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 8th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P3 permit and for a direction commanding the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6 objection and take a decision after hearing the petitioner and 1st respondent. 2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P6 objection is pending consideration before the Secretary respondent Corporation and requests this Court to issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 objection within a time frame. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, 1st respondent and standing counsel for respondents 2 & 3. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner and 1st respondent pointed out that the construction work is yet to be commenced. ::2:: W.P.(C).No.28063 Of 2011 In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Secretary of respondent corporation to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 objection within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and 1st respondent. Till the matter is finally disposed of by the Secretary of the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent shall not carryout the piling work. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-