← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/25703/2015disposed of

George Joseph v. The Secretary, Vannappuram Grama Panchayath

2015-08-21Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2015/30TH SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 25703 of 2015 (K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------------- GEORGE JOSEPH, AGED 65 YEARS, KAKKANATTU HOUSE, VANNAPPURAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 582.

BY ADV. SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S):

-------------------------- THE SECRETARY, VANNAPPURAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 582.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

WP(C).No. 25703 of 2015 (K) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.

P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 23/02/2015.

P3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) 9086/2012 DATED 16/07/2012. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

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

Msv/

A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.25703 of 2015 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of August, 2015.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent ot consider Ext.P2 application for building permit in the light of Ext.P3 judgement.

2. The petitioner is the owner of 15.54 Ares of land comprised in Sy.No.1492/1 of the Vannapuram village. This land is a garden land reclaimed more than 20 years before. All the adjacent lands are also reclaimed and several buildings are constructed. The land of the petitioner is remaining vacant in the middle of adjacent commercial buildings. The only possible and effective utility of land is for constructing a commercial building. Even after the lapse of the several months the respondent herein has not considered Ext.P2 application so far. The delay in granting building permit is causing loss to the petitioner ; it is

W.P.(C)No.25703 of 2015 alleged. It is with this backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court.

3. Arguments have been heard.

4. As the learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his arguments to a limited prayer for a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.2 application, this Court is of the view that, this writ petition can be disposed of even without issuing notice to the respondent Panchayat.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, within a period of 2 weeks of receipt of copy of this judgment, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

Sd/- A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, Judge.

ami/ //True copy// P.A. to Judge