IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18606 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. R.SURESH, T.C.30/1386, SURABHI, HOUSE NO.111, V.Y.ROAD, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. INDUKALA, W/O.R.SURESH, T.C.30/1386, SURABHI, HOUSE NO.111, V.Y.ROAD, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. SPECIAL SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION & SOCIAL WELFARE (G) DEPARTMENT GOVT.OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING OFFICE, KOTTARATHIL BUILDINGS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) FOR R2 SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR FOR R2 GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 18606 OF 2008 M = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd July 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioners submit that they had made an application for a building permit and that was rejected by Ext. P2 order issued by the respondent Corporation. The reason stated is that the land in question is included in the Medical College Development Scheme and therefore the request for building permit cannot be granted. 2. Petitioners contend that apart from framing the scheme as mentioned in Ext. P2 nothing further has been done by the authorities and therefore there is absolutely no justification to decline permit to the petitioners. Petitioners also draw support from the judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.)C) No. 6790/07 where an order declining building permit to an applicant on this very reason has been interfered by this Court and relief was granted. On facts, I see no difference between the case decided in Ext. P3 and the case of the petitioner. W.P.(C) No. 18606 OF 2008 -2- 3. In view of this the writ petition will stand disposed of in the following terms: Ext. P2 is quashed and the respondent Corporation is directed to pass fresh orders on the building permit application submitted by the petitioners favourably if the plan is otherwise in order on condition that the petitioners submit an undertaking in the form of an affidavit stating clearly that if a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is promulgated within one year of issuance of the building permit, the petitioners will surrender the property including the building constructed without claiming any compensation for the building. It is made clear that even thereafter if the Corporation or the Government wants to acquire the property for any genuine public purpose, this judgment will not stand in the way of doing so and under such an event the respondents will give adequate compensation to the petitioners. Fresh orders on the building permit application will be passed by the respondent Corporation at their earliest and at any rate within three weeks of receiving a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-