IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 23109 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.P.ISMAIL,S/O.KUNHAPUTTY HAJI, ARIPURAVAN PARAKKAL HOUSE,MELMURI,KONOMPARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,MALAPPURAM,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV.N.ABDUL MAJEED, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.23109 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 issued by the respondent Malappuram Municipality rejecting an application for building permit on two grounds. The first ground is that the application is for constructing a residence-cum-commercial building while the area is earmarked as a residential zone in terms of the DTP scheme. That objection of the Town Planner does not survive in view of the judgment of this Court in Nazar P.K. v. Malappuram Municipality [2009(3) KLT 35]. The second ground on which the application has been rejected is that the plan does not ensure that there is a distance of 35 meters from the middle of the adjoining highway. This again has been governed by the judgment of this Court in Peer Muhammed v. Chirakkandam Grama Panchayat [2008(3) KLT 300] which categorically lays down that such objection cannot be raised unless notification under Section 18(2) of the Highway Protection Act, 1999 has been issued. WPC.23109/09 Page numbers For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is allowed quashing Ext.P1 and directing that the respondent will obtain instructions of the PWD as to whether there is a notification under Section 18(2) of the Highway Protection Act, 1999 in relation to the highway in question and will decide on the issue accordingly, however, that no grounds referable to the DTP scheme shall be put against the petitioner and the application of the petitioner will be take up, considered and orders issued if it is otherwise in order. Let this happen within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.22/8.