IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 10987 of 2011(W) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. HAYARUNNISA, W/O. SEYID MUHAMMED BHUKHARI, SAJEER MANZIL, VALAKKODU VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. RENJITHA BHUKHARI, D/O. HAYARUNNISSA, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, HAYARUNNISA, SAJEER MANZIL, VALAKKODU VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. SANJU BHUKHARI, S/O. SEYID MUHMMED BHUKHARI, SAJEER MANZIL, VALAKKODU, PUNALUR, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.T.K.MARTHANDAN UNNITHAN MR.V.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 305. 2. PUNALUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PUNALUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 305. ADV. MR.B.KRISHNA MANI FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10987 of 2011(W) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: APPLICATION DTD. 3.2.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY. EXT.P2: ORDER DTD. 19.2.2011 ISSUED BY R1. EXT.P3: DECISION DTD. 9.7.2010 OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ....... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.10987 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed for quashing Exts.P2 & P3 and for a direction commanding the respondents to grant permission to the petitioners to construct building pursuant to Ext.P1 application without any further delay. The petitioners applied to the Punalur Municipality for permission to construct buildings in the property belonging to them which is located within the Municipal area. Ext.P1 is the application. It is the case of the petitioners that Ext.P1 is supported by all relevant documents which are necessary for granting permit for construction of the building. The request for grant of permit was declined by Ext.P2 communication only for the reason that there is a proposal to acquire the land. Ext.P2 is dated 19.2.2011. Previously, Ext.P3 resolution was passed on 9.7.2010 by the Punalur Municipality refusing to grant permit stating that the area including the property of the petitioner is included in the DTP Scheme and therefore, building permit cannot be granted. 2. Therefore, it is clear that the application for building permit was rejected on the ground that the land for which ::2:: W.P.(C).No.10987 Of 2011 permission sought for is covered by the Detailed Town Planning Scheme. The petitioner pointed out that till date no notification has been published nor any step has been taken to acquire the petitioners' land. 3. The Apex Court, in the decision reported in Raju s. Jethmalani and others v. State of Maharashtra and others (2005 (11) SCC 222), held that though land belonging to private persons can be included in development plan, unless the land is promptly acquired by State Government or the Municipal Corporation to effectuate the said purpose, the land owner cannot be denied the right to use the property for any other purpose. Therefore, I am constrained to hold that Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. 4. In the result, Exts.P2 communication & P3 resolution are quashed. The Secretary of the Municipality is directed to consider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ ::3:: W.P.(C).No.10987 Of 2011 petition before the Secretary of the Municipality for further action. The writ petition is disposed of as above. It is made clear that the judgment passed by this Court does not stand in the way of acquisition of the property of the petitioners in future, if circumstances so warrants, in accordance with law. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-