IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 123 of 2010(M) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------- E.T.DEVASSY, S/O.CHANKAN THOMAN, EDASSERY HOUSE, PALAYAMPARAMBU P.O., THRISSUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- CHALAKUDY MUNICIPALITY REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, CHALAKUDY. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR, SC FOR RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 123 OF 2010 (M) ===================== Dated this the 19th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P9. Petitioner owns land in Sy.No.504/2 of East Chalakudy Village. He applied for a building permit and was allowed to construct a commercial building exempting the land from the Zoning Regulations as per DTP Scheme. Construction was completed and long thereafter, petitioner applied to the Municipality to permit him to construct additional two floors, which is rejected by Ext.P9 again on the ground that the area is covered by a Town Planning Scheme and that individual exemption cannot be granted. It is challenging this order, the writ petition is filed. 3. Exemption has already been granted, building has been constructed and all that the petitioner wants is to construct additional two floors to the existing building. Once exemption has been granted, for further construction, there arise no question of any further exemption and if that be so, the reasoning contained in Ext.P9 order rejecting the petitioner's request cannot be WPC 123/10 :2 : sustained. 4. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in WP(C) No.20988/2008, this Court allowed a similar writ petition by Ext.P5 judgment, which was confirmed by the Division Bench in WA No.1837/2008 as per Ext.P6 judgment. Since the issue is covered in favour of the petitioner by the aforesaid judgments and for the reasons stated above, Ext.P9 order will stand set aside. Respondent is directed to pass orders on the application made by the petitioner in accordance with the observations made above. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp