← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/22441/2015dismissed

Kizhakepurayil Dhananjayan v. The Payyannur Municipality

2015-09-30Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/8TH ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 22441 of 2015 (E) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

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

1. KIZHAKEPURAYIL DHANANJAYAN AGED 54 YEARS S/O.MAVILA KRISHNAN NAMBIR, 'DHANALAKSHMI'

VILLAGE OFFICE ROAD, PAYANNUR, KANNUR 670 307.

2. JAYALAKSHMI POTHERA AGED 44 YEARS W/O.DHANANJAYAN, 'DHANALAKSHMI', VILLAGE OFFICE ROAD PAYANNUR, KANNUR 670 307.

BY ADV. SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. THE PAYYANNUR MUNICIPALITY REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PAYYANNUR PO, KANNUR 670 307.

2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (R.B), DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN R2 BY ADV.P.P.PADMALAYAN,GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 3009-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 22441 of 2015 (E) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1- TRUE COPY OF THE RGISTERED SALE DEED NO.2621/2006 P2- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.64504/RB2/2014/LSGD DATED 29.11.2014 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.E1-BA-801 /13-14 DATED 2.3.2015 P4- TRUE COPY FO THE APPLICATION DATED 17.4.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS (THROUGH THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT) ALONG WITH REVISED PLAN RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL TRUE COPY SKS P.A. TO JUDGE

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

-------------------------------------- W.P(C)NO. 22441 OF 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2015

JUDGMENT

It is reported that Ext.P4 application for building plan has already been dealt with and orders passed. It is open to the petitioner to challenge the said order if they are aggrieved.

2.

The writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the remedy as indicated above.

V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE sks