IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3108 of 2009(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. DR.SUSHIJA SUKUMARAN, 29 YEARS, D/O.P.P.SUKUMARAN, PUTHIYA PURAYIL CHOMBALA, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. PRADEEP KUMAR.T.P.38 YEARS,S/O.KELAPPAN, T.P.HOUSE, (THEKKE PUTHIYA HOUSE)CHOMBALA, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,MINISTRY FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. AZHIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, AZHIYOOR,VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE. 3. TOWN PLANNER, KOZHIKODE-673001. 4. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CIVIL STATION,KOZHIKODE 673020. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, AZHIYOOR VILLAGE OFFICE AZHIYOOR VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 3108 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 29th January, 2009. J U D G M E N T After complying with the requisite formalities, the petitioners submitted an application for building permit before the 2nd respondent. The Town Planner, Kozhikode has now objected to the site plan submitted by the petitioners on the ground that the plan submitted by the petitioners cannot be approved since a 7 meter wide access road is not available to the site of the industry proposed by the petitioners in the property in question. According to the petitioners, 7 meters wide road is not mandatory as is clear from Rule 57(5) of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules. According to them, the privoso to the said Rule stipulates that in all existing developed areas other than industrial areas where small industrial use is permissible, the minimum width of approach to the plot shall be not less than 3 meters. According to the petitioners, the petitioners' building plan satisfies all the conditions of the proviso to the said Rule. The petitioners have brought this fact to the attention of the Town Planner as well as the Secretary of the 2nd respondent Panchayat by filing Ext. P13. The petitioners now would be satisfied with a direction to the 3rd respondent-Town Planner to consider Ext. P13 in accordance with the said Rule. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the 3rd respondent should take a fresh look into the matter, taking into account the contentions of the petitioners based on the proviso to Rule 57(5). Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P13 specifically addressing himself as to why the proviso to the said Rule is not applicable to the petitioners' building plan. The said consideration and passing of orders shall be within a period of one W.P.C. No. 3108/2009 -: 2 :- month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard before passing orders. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.