Vijayan.K.R. v. The Thrissur Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2015/2ND MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 32778 of 2014 (V) PETITIONER(S):

---------------------- VIJAYAN.K.R., AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.RAMANKUTTY, RESIDING AT KARAYIL HOUSE, KIZHAKUMARI P.O., PERINGOTTUKARA DESOM, THANNYAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 571. (THE PETITIONER IS REPRESENTED HEREIN BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER - YOUNGER BROTHER VINAYAN K.R., S/O.RAMANKUTTY, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT KARAYIL HOUSE, KIZHAKUMURI P.O.

PERINGOTTUKARA DESOM, THANNYAM VILLAGE THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 571).

BY ADVS.SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD SMT.P.R.REMYA RESPONDENT(S):

------------------------- THE THRISSUR CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR - 680 001.

BY ADVS. SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN, SC SRI.V.N.HARIDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

PJ

WP(C).No. 32778 of 2014 (V) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE, PUNKUNNAM, DATED 04/04/2014.

EXHIBIT P2:

TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE PUNKUNNAM TO THE PETITIONER DATED 19/04/2014. EXHIBIT P3:

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 21/07/2014.

EXHIBIT P4:

TRUE COPY OF FEW PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICTING THE LIE OF THE PROPERTY DATED NIL.

EXHIBIT P5:

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) NO. 18776/2014 ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 22/07/2014. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 32778 of 2014 Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2015

JUDGMENT

In the light of the ratio laid down in the judgment dated 22.07.2014 in W.P. (C) No. 18776/2014, the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same lines applying the ratio laid down by the learned single Judge in the said decision, thereby quashing Exhibit P3.

Consequently, the 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 one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-