Allowed

Vinodkumar v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Feb 2015WP(C)/1432/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition by applying the ratio from Mohammed Abdul Basheer v. State of Kerala, setting aside an impugned communication (Ext.P4) and directing the 2nd respondent to reconsider the petitioner's building permission application physically and expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P4 set aside; 2nd respondent directed to consider building permission application afresh after physical verification within one month.

Vinodkumar Vs the State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/6TH PHALGUNA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 1432 of 2015 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

¶8

VINODKUMAR, AGED 52 YEARS S/O.V.C.NAIR, "VAISHNAVAM" VALIYAPARAMBIL ROAD ELAMAKARA, COCHIN-26.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶12

THE IRIMBILIYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, VALIAKUNNU POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 552

¶13

R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.MOIDEEN KUTTY

¶14

R BY SMT. C.K. SHERIN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 1432 of 2015 (D)

¶17

: 2 :

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶20

EXT.P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, IRIMBILIYAM DATED 14-2-2014 WITH THE TRANSLATION.

¶21

EXT.P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER DATED 6- 11-2014 WITH THE TRANSLATION.

¶22

EXT.P3 - A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE OFFICE OF THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES CHENNAI DATED 1-7-2013.

¶23

EX.P4 - A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 27-11-2014 WITH THE TRANSLATION.

¶24

EXT.P5 - A TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK ENTRY CONCERNING THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL.

¶25

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

/True Copy/

P.A to Judge.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶30

---------------------------------W.P. (C) No. 1432 of 2015 (D)

¶31

¶32

Dated this the 25^th day of February, 2015.

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

In the light of the ratio laid down in Mohammed Abdul

¶35

Basheer v. State of Kerala (2012 (3) KLT 86), this Court disposes of the writ petition on the same lines applying the ratio laid down by the learned Division Bench in the said decision, thereby setting aside Ext.P4.

¶36

Consequently, the 2^nd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application for building permission afresh, if necessary, by referring the matter to the District Town Planner, after subjecting the land in question to physical verification, and thereafter pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶37

Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.

¶38

¶39

W.P.(C) No.19225/2014 -2-

Vinodkumar v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinodkumar v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Mukunda Prasad Vs K.Madhusudanan Nair

Joy Scaria Vs Meenachil Grama Panchayath

Fish Marketing Co-Operative Society No.E 529 Vs State of Kerala

Mridula Chandy Vs Corporation of Cochin

Aboobacker A.M. Vs District Medical Officer, Thrissur

Suresh K. Vs State of Kerala