Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE27H DAY OF JANUARY20147TH MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 2616 of 2014 (B) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- POULOSE S/O. THOMMEN, AGED73 THEKKEKUNNATHU MANGALATHU PUTHENPARAMBIL, EAST GATE, VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.S.NIDHEESH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VAIKOM - 686 141.
2. THE SECRETARY VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY, VAIKOM - 686 141.
3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. R1&R2 BY ADV. SMT.A.SREEKALA R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJU MEENATTOOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2701-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 2616 of 2014 (B) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED0608/2012 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED0310/2012 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF REMITTANCE ISSUED FROM VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY. EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED TO THE ADJACENT SY NO. 158/1 A1 TO K.M. JOSEPH. EXHIBT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED TO THE ADJACENT SY. NO. 159/12B TO MADHU PILLAI. EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED2106/2013 IN W.P (C)14810/2013. EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED2407/2009 PASSED BY THE SECRETARY, VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY. EXHIBIT-P8-TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED2011/2013. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. dlk C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 2616 of 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2014 JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to be the owner in absolute possession of a property having an extent of 6 cents comprised in Survey No. 127/5/E2 of Naduvile Village in Vaikom Taluk. The petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application seeking building permit before the second respondent. Feeling aggrieved by the delay in the matter of its consideration the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 14810/2013. The same was disposed of as per Ext.P6 judgment with a direction to the second respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon. Consequently, Ext.P3 application was considered and Ext.P7 order rejecting the said application was passed. The petitioner filed Ext.P8 revision against Ext.P7 order before the Government purportedly invoking the remedy under Rule 161 of the Kerala Municipal Building Rules. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the receipt of Ext.P8 no action has been taken thereon. W.P.(C) No. 2616 of 2014 2 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and also the learned Government Pleader. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P8 revision against Ext.P7 under Rule 161 of the Kerala Municipal Building Rules, before the Government I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition without making any observation as to the merits of the rival contentions. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent consider Ext.P8 petition filed against Ext.P7 and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously and in accordance with law, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JUDGE. dlk