High Court of KeralaWP(C)/2431/2015disposed of

Srajudheen v. Perinthalmanna Municipality

2015-02-06Honourable Mr. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/17TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 2431 of 2015 (D) --------------------------- PETITIONERS:

------------------------

1. SRAJUDHEEN, S/O.VEERAN, 'KADEEJA MANZIL', THIRUNARAYAPURAM, P.O.PULAMANTHOL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 323.

2. SULAIKA,W/O.SRAJUDHEEN, 'KADEEJA MANZIL', THIRUNARAYANAPURAM, P.O.PULAMANTHOL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 323. BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI RESPONDENTS:

-------------------------

1. PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY, PERINTHALMANNA,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-679 322. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2. THE SECRETARY, PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 322.

R1 & R2 BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).No. 2431 of 2015 (D) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PERINTHALMANNA VILLAGE OFFICER IN FAVOUR OF THE IST PETITIONER DATED 6.11.2013 EXT.P1(A) ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PERINTHALMANNA VILLAGE OFFICER IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 6.11.2013 EXT.P2(A) ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P2 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.11.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3(A) ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P3.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 2431 of 2015 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 06th day of February, 2015

JUDGMENT

In the light of the ratio laid down in Praveen K. v. Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram and others [2010 (2) KHC 499], the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same lines, applying the ratio laid down by the learned Division Bench in the said decision, thereby quashing Exhibit P3.

2. Consequently, the second respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner for building permission afresh, if necessary, by referring the matter to the District Town Planner, and thereafter pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-