IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2008 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16608 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- HAZEENA, W/O.AZAD, 4/18, NEDUNGODE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. CHITTUR THATHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF FIRE FORCE, OFFICE OF THE FIRE FORCE, NEAR RAMA VARMA CLUB ERNAKULAM. 3. NARAYANANKUTTY, S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, ANICODE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 16608 OF 2008 B = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th June 2008 J U D G M E N T Building permit has been granted to the petitioner for the construction of the ground floor and the 1st floor. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for permit to construct 2nd floor of the building and Ext. P6 is the receipt of payment of the fee. It is also stated that the petitioner had applied for Fire NOC and the application made by the petitioner is still pending before the 1st respondent. In Ext. P7 the 1st respondent has informed the petitioner that his application for construction of the 2nd floor of the building will be considered as and when the Fire NOC is received. 2. It is disclosed to the petitioner in Ext. P9 reply issued under the Right to Information Act that it is in view of the pendency of Ext. P2 suit filed by the petitioner against the 3rd respondent, that the 1st respondent has not so far forwarded the application for Fire NOC to the 2nd respondent for his consideration. Thus, while the 1st respondent is declining to grant building permit for want of Fire W.P.(C) No. 16608 OF 2008 -2- NOC, he is also declining to forward the application to the 2nd respondent for consideration. As a result of this, petitioner is not in a position to commence construction of the 2nd floor of his building. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Ext. P2, the plaint in O.S. No. 463/06 before the Munsiffs Court, Chittur and contends that it is a suit filed by the petitioner against the 3rd respondent for fixation of boundary and rightly points out that the pendency of the suit before the Munsiffs Court has no relevance in so far as his application for Fire NOC and building permit are concerned. 4. I am inclined to agree with the counsel for the petitioner that the pendency of the suit should not have stood in the way of the 1st respondent forwarding the application made by the petitioner for Fire NOC to the 2nd respondent for his consideration and appropriate orders. This, the 1st respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 2 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 5. Once orders are passed by the 2nd respondent on the application for Fire NOC, in the light of the said order the W.P.(C) No. 16608 OF 2008 -3- petitioner's application for building permit for constructing the 2nd floor of the building will also be dealt with and orders passed without delay. 6. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-