IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 8276 of 2008(I) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SANJAY ALEX, MOOLACHERIYIL HOUSE, VELLOOR PO, PAMPADY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 501. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PWD, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD, NATIONAL HIGHWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY, [R] DIVISION, MUVATTUPUZHA. 4. ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY SUB DIVISION, KANHIRAPPALLY. 5. KOOROPADA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOOROPADA PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/08/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 8400 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8276 of 2008(I) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 18.12.2007 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PAMPADY. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 4.2.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING N OC IN TERMS WITH THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY ACT, 1956 AND CONTROL OF NATIONAL HIGHWAY (LAND AND TRAFFIC) ACT 2002. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIFIC PERMISSION FOR ACCESS TO THE HIGHWAY DATED 4.2.2008 UNDER SECTION 29(2) OF THE CONTROL OF NATIONAL HIGHWAY (LAND AND TRAFFIC) ACT, 2002. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTED 1.3.2008 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4(a) - TRUE COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT OF REJECTION OF NOC BY 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENTS ON THE REAR SIDE OF LETTER DATED 1.3.2008. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED NO. 24935/H1/04/PWD DATED 18.10.2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. NH5 D10-2815/03(A) DATED 6.2.2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ENCLOSURE. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 6.11.2007 REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.2407/2007 OF SRO PAMPADY. EXT.P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs S.SIRI JAGAN, J ====================== W.P(C)Nos.8400 & 8276 of 2008 ====================== Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in rejecting the petitioners' application for 'no objection certificate' for construction of buildings by the side of the National Highway 220, on the ground that the State Government had directed the PWD authorities to issue notification for fixing a building line, 35 meters from the central line of the existing National Highway. According to the petitioners, no such notification had been issued so far but the 2nd respondent had issued Ext.P6 to all the offices directing them not to give No Objection Certificate. According to the petitioners, the action of the 2nd respondent is unsustainable. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: (i) To issue any writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing Exts.P4(a), P5 and P6; (ii) To issue any writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 3 and 4 to consider the application of the petitioner Exts.P2, P3 and P4 ignoring Exts.P5 and P6; (iii) To issue any writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 3 and 4 to issue no objection certificate to the petitioner, in pursuance of W.P(C)Nos.8400 & 8276 of 2008 - 2 - Ext.P4 request of the 5th respondent; (iv) To issue a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus directing the 5th respondent to issue building permit to the petitioner on complying with the requirements under the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999.” The petitioner now submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this court in Peermohammed.M v. The Chirakandam Grama Panchayat [2008 (2) KLJ 856]. The Government Pleader does not dispute that the issue is covered by that decision. The impugned orders are accordingly quashed and these writ petitions are disposed of, directing the respondents to take appropriate further action on the applications of the petitioner as directed in the said decision. Orders shall be passed within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs