IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2011 / 27TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 17460 of 2010(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ABDUL JABBAR, 'ZIRAJ' PAYYAMBALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KANNUR MUNICIPALITY, REP; BY ITS SECRETARY,KANNUR. 3. THE SECRETARY, KANNUR MUNICIPALITY, KANNUR. 4. C.C.NIRMALA, PAVI NIVAS, TALAP, KANNUR. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJU MEENATTOOR, R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI. K.K. CHANDRAN PILLAI, S.C, R4 BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.17460/2010-F: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PERMIT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.3. DT. 21/04/2009. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.3. DTD. 26/03/2010. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.3. DTD. 12/05/2010. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MINISTER OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DTD. 20/08/2010. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 20/08/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT:- EXT.R4.A: COPY OF THE SANCTIONED PLAN PROVIDED TO THE R.4. DTD. 18/11/09. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Prv. HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 17460 OF 2010 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2011 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P1 building permit, for a direction commanding respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate steps against the 4th respondent for violating the provisions of the Building Rules and for a direction to the 3rd respondent to revoke Ext.P1 permit. 2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter-affidavit in which it is inter alia stated that the building was constructed in accordance with the plan and that there is no violation of the Building Rules. The question as to whether there is violation or not is a matter to be considered on an appreciation of evidence. Therefore, this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India finds it inappropriate to go into the factual disputes. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P4 representation was submitted to the Secretary of the Municipality requesting to revoke Ext.P1 building permit and the -2- W.P.(C).No.17460/2010 same is pending consideration before the 3rd respondent. Therefore, the learned counsel requests this Court to direct the 3rd respondent- Secretary to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 representation within a time frame. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent-secretary to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 representation, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and the 4th respondent, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is stated by the petitioner that he has produced various documents before the Secretary of the Municipality in support of his contentions. Needless to say that the Secretary shall consider the evidence on record on the basis of the materials produced before passing orders on Ext.P4 representation. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.