IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 9432 of 2008(W) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- K.SESHADRI, VRINDAVAN, KAILAS NAGAR KALPATHY, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPAL OFFICE, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE SECRETARY, PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPAL OFFICE, PALAKKAD. * ADDL. RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 IMPLEADED ADDL. R4: THE ART AND HERITAGE COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. R5: THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. R6: THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER, PALAKKAD. * ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24/03/2008 IN I.A. NO.4152/2008. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.) - R2, R3 SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON – R2, R3 SRI.JIBU P THOMAS - R3 SRI.P.S.APPU - R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9432/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that, on the strength of Ext.P1 permit issued by the respondent Municipality,petitioner constructed a multi storied building. According to him, by February, 2008, the construction was mostly completed. This contention is sought to be urged on the basis of Ext.P2 completion certificate issued on 3.2.2008. Counsel also refers to Ext.P3 photographs. In the meantime, on receipt of Ext.R2(b) dated 24.1.2008 from the Government that the area in question has been identified as a heritage zone and that construction can be proceeded with only after obtaining NOC from the Art and Heritage Commission, municipality issued Ext.P4 notice preventing the petitioner from continuing the work. It was challenging Ext.P4, the writ petition has been filed. Wp(c).No.9432/08 2 2. On the basis of the interim order dated 24.3.2008, petitioner was permitted to proceed with the interior works of the building which also is stated to have been completed. At this point of time what the petitioner seeks is a direction to the Municipality to number the building. 3. Fact remains that, on the strength of Ext.P1, building has been constructed by the petitioner and what is remaining is only its numbering. It is not in dispute that, it was subsequent to the construction of the building, the requirement of NOC from the Art and Heritage Commission became mandatory. Since the building has already been constructed, such a requirement for commencing the construction, cannot be insisted against the petitioner. 4. In the aforesaid facts, since the petitioner has completed construction of the building acting upon a valid building permit, there is no reason to insist that the petitioner should obtain the NOC from the Commissioner. 5. The counsel for the respondent placed reliance on a judgment in WP(c).No.11250/2008, in which since the building was not completed by the time when Ext.R2(b) was Wp(c).No.9432/08 3 issued, it was ordered that NOC should be obtained. In this case since the construction has been completed, I do not consider it necessary that petitioner should obtain NOC and in my view, the petitioner is entitled to have the building numbered. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioner has filed an application for numbering the building, the same will be taken up for consideration. The Secretary of the Municipality will inspect the building and if he is satisfied that the construction of the building is strictly in terms of Ext.P1 building permit, the Secretary shall proceed to number the building as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. Wp(c).No.9432/08 4