IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2008 / 22ND SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23837 of 2008(K) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- V.K.SHERIFA, VAZHAYIL KUNIYIL HOUSE, KAVUMBHAGAM, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.TOJAN J. VATHIKULAM RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SECRETARY, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.V.MANOJKUMAR FOR R3 ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).23837/2008-K APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE BUILDIHNG PLAN. EXT.P1(a): COPY OF THE SITE PLAN EXT.P2: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.E3/BA/339/07-08 DATED 19/03/2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE MUNICIPALITY. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.28206 OF 2006 DATED 03/11/2006. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO.80 OF 2007 DATED 23/01/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23837/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P2, an order rejecting the application made by the petitioner for a building permit, on the ground that the land in question is proposed to be included in the master plan. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proposal mentioned in Ext.P2 can not be taken as a reason for rejecting the application made by the petitioner. According to him, even after a scheme is finalised, if consequential action is not taken, that itself is a good ground for directing the Municipality to grant building permit. 2. Counsel is relying on Exts.P4 and P5 judgments rendered by this court dealing with identical cases. On going through Exts.P4 and P5 judgments relied on by the WP(c).No.23837/2008 2 learned counsel, I am satisfied that the cases dealt with this court in those cases are similar to the cases of the petitioner. For that reason itself, Ext.P2 deserves to be set aside and I do so. It is directed that the Municipality shall reconsider Ext.P1 application made by the petitioner and orders thereon shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. WP(c).No.23837/2008 3