C.G.Mathew v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2015/3RD MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 18046 of 2014 (E) PETITIONER(S):
---------------------- C.G.MATHEW, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, MANAGING PARTNER, VELIYIL ENGINEERING 33/297 KD PLOT, KALAMASSERY P.O., COCHIN - 683 109 RESIDING AT VELIYIL HOUSE, ELAMKUNNAPUZHA P.O. COCHIN - 682 503.
BY ADVS.SMT.M.M.JASMIN SRI.R.SANJITH RESPONDENT(S):
-------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT.
2. KALAMASSERY MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MAIN ROAD CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR, ERNAKULAM - 682 033.
3. SECRETARY KALAMASSERY MUNICIPALITY, MAIN ROAD CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR, ERNAKULAM - 682 033.
4. K.A.IBRAHIM KUNJU, AGED 59 YEARS S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, KAUVALIL HOUSE, NJALAKAM KARA KD PLOT P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM - 683 109.
5. WAHIDA, AGED 53 YEARS W/O.IBRAHIM KUNJU, KAUVALIL HOUSE, NJALAKAM KARA KD PLOT P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM - 683 109.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JUSTIN JACOB R2 & 3 BY SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER R4 & 5 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PJ
WP(C).No. 18046 of 2014 (E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 05.2.14 BEARING NO. B.A 418/12. P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT BEARING NO. BA - 418/12 DT. 20.7.12 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY 2ND RESPONDENT.
P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 19.6.13 IN IA NO. 1173/2013 IN CMA NO. 16/13 OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ERNAKULAM. P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 05.6.14.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.
/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 18046 of 2014 Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2015
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, as well as the learned Government Pleader, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.
2. The petitioner, having constructed a residential house on his property within the limits of the second respondent Municipality, applied for occupancy certificate (mentioned erroneously as completion certificate in the writ petition) in the year 2013. In response thereto, the second respondent Municipality issued Exhibit P1 proceedings contending that the petitioner's request could not be entertained since civil proceedings were pending between the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5.
3. As could be seen from record, later, the petitioner has submitted Exhibit P4 representation reiterating his request. It is further evident that the petitioner completed the construction in terms of Exhibit P3 interim direction of the Civil
W.P.(c) No. 18046 of 2014 Court. The learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 has, however, submitted that the respondent Municipality is willing to consider petitioner's Exhibit P4 representation for the issuance of occupancy certificate without reference to civil proceedings, subject to the petitioner's fulfillment of other statutory criteria.
4. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, as well as the learned Government Pleader, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Court disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to the third respondent to consider Exhibit P4 representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-