IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 28464 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. U.RASHEEDHA, W/O. SADHARUDHEEN EAST VENNAKKARA, PALAKKAD. 2. P.KHADEEJA, W/O. ABDUL NAZAR EAST VENNAKKARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY PALAKKAD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) No.28464 of 2009 EXT.P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR GRANTING BUILDING PERMIT. EXT.P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.8.2009. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.28464 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are owners of a parcel of land situated within the local limits of Palakkad Municipality. With a view to put up a building in that parcel of land, petitioners applied for a building permit to the Secretary of the Palakkad Municipality. By Ext.P2 order dated 19.8.2009, the Secretary of Palakkad Municipality rejected the said application on the ground that the land belonging to the petitioners is covered by the Detailed Town Planning Scheme for Big Bazar area and is proposed to be acquired for commercial purposes. Ext.P2 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The Detailed Town Planning Scheme for Big Bazar area in Palakkad Municipality was notified by the Government way back in the year 1986. It is conceded at the Bar that till date, the Government or the local authority have not acquired even an inch of land for the said purpose. In such circumstances, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Raju S.Jethmalani and others v. State of Maharashtra and others (2005 (11) SCC 222), the decision of the Palakkad Municipality rejecting the petitioners application for building permit cannot be sustained. In Raju.S.Jethmalani's case (Supra), the Apex Court held that though W.P.(C) No.28464 of 2009 2 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 landowner cannot be denied the right to use the property for any other purpose. I am therefore constrained to hold that Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. In the result, I allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P2 and direct the Secretary, Palakkad Municipality to reconsider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioners and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within six weeks from the date on which the petitioners produce a certified copy of this judgment him. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.