IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2008 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10966 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KALADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KALADY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIJAYAKRISHNAN O.K., S/O. O.A.KRISHNAN, AGED 49 YEARS, OZHAKKANATTU, VELLOORKUNNAM, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. V.D. SULATHA, W/O. E.K. PRABHAKARAN, AGED 51 YEARS, ETTUNGALPADI HOUSE, KALADY P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. E.K. PRABHAKARAN, AGED 74 YEARS, S/O. AYYAPPAN, ETTUNGALPADI HOUSE, KALADY P.O., ERNAKULAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No. 10966 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT The Panchayat challenges Ext.P7 order of the Tribunal directing the Panchayat to reconsider the application for building permit submitted by the appellant before the Tribunal. The application submitted by the appellant was rejected by the Panchayat on the ground that there is a proposal to acquire the plot for the purpose of widening the road to Kalady market. The Tribunal noticed the judgment of this court in Hassan v. Corporation of Calicut ( 1996(2)KLT 839) as well as the conceded position that no notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act had been promulgated yet for the acquisition. Ext.P7 is challenged by the Panchayat mainly on the basis of Ext.P5 communication from the Deputy Director of Panchayats to the Directorate informing that there is a genuine need to widen the road which leads to Kalady market and also Ext.P6 order of the Government according sanction to the Panchayat's proposal to have the properties WPC.No.10966/08 2 acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. According to Sri.Dinesh Mathew.J.Murikan, counsel for the petitioner it is certain that within a couple of months a notification under Section 4(1)of the Land Acquisition Act will be promulgated regarding the acquisition of the plot in question. 2. On going through Ext.P7 order of the Tribunal, I find that what the Tribunal had directed is only a reconsideration of the application for building permit. The Tribunal has not set any time frame for making reconsideration. If the petitioner's confidence that within two months, notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act will be issued is well founded, the petitioner does not have to worry about Ext.P7 order. With the above observation, I decline the reliefs sought for by the petitioner and dispose of the writ petition accordingly. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.10966/08 2