IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2011 / 13TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21267 of 2011(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ANTONY SHAJAN, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. GREGORY, PADANILATH HOUSE, THUTHIYOOR, KAKANAD. 2. SUDHI JOSE.P, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. JOSE.P.J, PANANCHERRY HOUSE, 15/1132, VARU VAIDYAR ROAD, KAZHUTHUMUTTU, MOOLAMKUZHI, KOCHI -02. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL SRI.P.A.ABHILASH SRI.K.S.DILU CHAKRAVARTHI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 2. SECRETARY, THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-30. 3. THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, KAKKANAD, KOCHI -30. 4. CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, KOCHI CITY. 5. D L F HOME DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, D L F CENTRE, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 001. REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR. WPC NO.21267/2011 6. AUTHORISED SIGANTORY, ZONAL OFFICE, D L F HOME DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, 4TH FLOOR, P D R BHAVAN, KALLIYIL LANE, FORESHORE ROAD, KOCHI - 682 016. MR.S.SHANAVAS KHAN, SC MS.K.MEERA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.21267/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1(a) (b) (c) : COPY OF PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE INFORMATION OFFICER (KAKKANAD) AND REPLY THEREOF AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1(b). P2 : COPY OF LEGAL NOTICE DATED 05/07/2011. P3 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 20/07/2011. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... WP(C) No.21267 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 4th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. This Writ Petition is filed challenging construction of building complex by the 5th respondent. The allegation is that respondents 2 & 3 issued permit for development and construction without following the statutory provisions. However, we are unable to entertain the Writ Petition challenging the construction for the simple reason that the 5th respondent has already made massive investment and two towers with 20 floors each have already been completed. Public Interest Litigation should not be allowed to be prosecuted to blackmail developers who after making massive investment cannot be put to heavy loss. Strangely, only two persons have raised objection about the construction, even though the project comprises of 25 acres of land acquired by WP(C) No.21267/2011 2 the 5th respondent, where several buildings are simultaneously constructed and many others are in advance stages. We, therefore, do not find any ground to admit the Writ Petition challenging the validity of the permit issued for construction of the building complex, which is going on. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg