IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 17TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2886 of 2008(R) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ DR. K.S.ABDUL NAZIR, S/O. MOOSA SYED MUHAMMED, AGED 46 YEARS, 'DUS DROP', SAIDARAPALLY, THALASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, P.O.THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, THALASSERY MUNICIPALITY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. KERALA STATE, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. I.V.PRAMOD, SC, MUNICIPALITY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.2886 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Sri.I.V.Pramod enters appearance for respondents 1 and 2 and Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the third respondent. I have heard the submissions of Sri.I.V.Pramod, learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. The grievance of the petitioner is that his application for construction of a building has been rejected by Ext.P2 intimation on the reason that the plot upon which the petitioner proposes to construct the building comes within the sector centre as per the Thalassery town development map. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the scheme has been actually abandoned by the municipality. Learned counsel invited my attention to various judgments such as G.C.D.A. v. Dr.M.Chandrasekhar ( 1994(1) KLT 778, Hassan v Corporation of Cochin ( 1196(2)KLT 839, Beerankutty v. Municipal Commissioner, Manjery ( 1984 KLT Case No. 77 Page No.46). I find force in the submission. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioners will be WPC.No.2886/08 2 prepared to undertake that in the event of any portion of the plot being required for public purposes, petitioner will be prepared to demolish or remove the construction without raising any claim whatsoever for compensation for the construction provided the request in that regard is given by the municipality within one year of municipality granting permission. Under these circumstances, I quash Ext.P2 and direct the Municipality to pass fresh orders on the application submitted by the petitioner for building permit and on the original of the plan submitted by the petitioner, provided the petitioner files an affidavit in which it is stated that in the event of any portion of the building and the building site is being required by the municipality for public purposes within one year of municipality granting permit, no claim will be made by the petitioner for compensation for the building portion. Orders will be passed without being influenced by the currency of Thalassery Town Development Map at the earliest and at any rate within three weeks of petitioner filing affidavit as directed in this judgment. If the plan is otherwise in order, the same will be approved. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.2886/08 3