IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 1727 of 2009(E) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.SAVITHRI, T.C.48/255(5), VARUVILAKATHU VEEDU POONTHURA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RAJEEVAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUVALLOM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. TAHSILDAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI. M.A. ASIF R1 & R2 SRI P.K. MANOJ KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.1727 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner wants to excavate soil from a plot of land having an extent of 20.995 cents situated in Sy. N.120/4- 3,120/4-4 of Thiruvalla in Village of Thiruvananthapuram Taluk. It is stated that he has already obtained building permit and Exts.P1 and P2 are relied on. It is stated that when he attempted to make the site a suitable one for starting construction, he was prevented by respondents 3 and 4 and it was therefore that the writ petition is filed. 2. Counsel for the petitioner relying on Ext.P3, an interim order passed by this court permitting excavation for the purpose of constructing a residential house. The facts are identical and therefore there is no reason to take a different view. WP(c).Noi.1727/09 /2/ In view of the purpose for which excavation is sought for, I feel that it is only appropriate that the petitioner is permitted to undertake necessary excavation for the purpose of construction the residential house in terms of Ext.P1 and P2. It is clarified that it will be always open to the 3rd respondent to supervise the work and issue such instructions as he deems necessary. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).Noi.1727/09 /2/