IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 22952 of 2009(L) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- A.J.VARGHESE AGED 35, S/O.A.V.JOSE, ALUKKA HOUSE, ARISTO ROAD, H.NO. 4/196, CHELAKKOTTUKARA, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADVS.MR.T.M.CHANDRAN MR.V.A.SASIDHARAN MR.JOSEPH ALBIN NEDUNTHALLY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF TRICHUR REP. BY THE SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE TRICHUR CORPORATION, TRICHUR. 2. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE TRICHUR CORPORATION, TRICHUR. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. MR.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATION R1 & R2 BY ADV.MR.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. 22952/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.2160/08/ P2:- COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.341/1/09. P3:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. P4:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH P5:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. P6:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. P7:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH P8:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. P9:- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. P10:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 30.7.09 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER. P11:- COPY OF THE SPECIFICATION REPORT DTD. NIL. P12:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 24.7.09 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT. P13:- COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.123/08/LSGD DTD. 28.4.08. P14:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 12.6.08 IN WPC. NO.10099/08 ON THE FILE OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. P15:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 25.5.09 IN WA. NO.955/09 ON THE FILE OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.22952 of 2009-L = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of September, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner submitted an application for permit for alteration and addition of an existing house. The fact that a house is existing is not in dispute. However, the application has been rejected on the ground that in terms of the zoning as per the DTP Scheme, the land is shown as agricultural land. Though Exts.P14 and P15 judgments are confined to the facts of those cases, there is no reason why the petitioner's case for building permit for additional constructions should be refused on a ground referable to the nature of the land when the basic fact that there is already a building in the land is not disputed. Under such circumstances, the impugned orders are quashed and this writ petition is allowed directing that WP(C)22952/09 -: 2 :- the petitioner's application for permit will be taken up, considered and disposed of in accordance with law without reference to the clauses of the DTP Scheme. Let this be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/140909