Kerala High Court, in a writ petition, directed the Payyannur Municipality to consider an application for extension of a building permit within six weeks, noting the dispute over permit validity expiry.
Directed the Municipality to consider the application for extension of permit under Rule 15A within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929
WP(C).No. 7744 of 2008(V)
PETITIONER:
BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
RESPONDENTS:
BY SHRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.
W.P.(C) No. 7744 of 2008
Dated, this the 7th day of March, 2008
J U D G M E N T
In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, the petitioners are challenging Ext.P9 order issued by the Secretary of the Municipality directing the petitioners to stop the construction work, which they have taken up on the basis of the building permit dated 08/03/1998, on the reason that the validity of
the permit has expired. Under Ext.P9, the petitioners are threatened that in case construction work is continued, the constructions will be treated as illegal constructions and appropriate legal action will be taken against them. According to the petitioners, after Ext.P6 the petitioners requested for renewal of the permit, but the request was declined by the Municipality. But the Government noticed the fact that petitioners had surrendered a portion of very valuable property belonging to them for 12 metres wide road freely, issued Ext.P8 order directing the Municipality to issue building permit to the petitioners on condition that 3 metres of building line should be maintained from the margin of the 12 metres wide road. Pursuant to the Government's order, the petitioners submitted a revised plan which was approved by the Municipality
WP(C) No. 7744/2008
-2-
vide their endorsement on the original of Ext.P1 on 13/05/2005. According to the petitioners, since revised plan was approved on 13/05/2005, the permit Ext.P6 should relate forward to 13/05/2005 and it will expire only on 13/05/2008. The above argument of the petitioners, in my opinion, merits consideration at the hands of the Municipality in the circumstances of this case. The petitioners have submitted Ext.P10 application for extension of the permit under Rule 15A of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules.
(PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)
jg
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Municipality should consider the petitioners' application for extension of building permit under Rule 15A.
Whether the time limit for passing orders should be six weeks.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S.K.HAMZA HAJI AND ANR.
STATE OF KERALA AND ANR.
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
