Allowed

M.G. Sadanandan v. Thrissur Corporation

Kerala HC4 Feb 2015WP(C)/1644/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Bench applied the ratio from Nasar P.K. v. Malappuram Municipality to quash Ext.P1. The Court directed the first respondent to reconsider the petitioners' building permission application by referring the matter to the District Town Planner and pass orders within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Quashed Ext.P1; directed first respondent to consider building permission application afresh by referring matter to District Town Planner and pass orders within six weeks.

M.G. Sadanandan Vs Thrissur Corporation — 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 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/15TH MAGHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 1644 of 2015 (E)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

M.G. SADANANDAN AGED 45 YEARS S/O.GOPALAN EZHUTHASSAN, MUNDAYOOR VALAPPIL (H) PERAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR.

¶8

MANJULA V.R.

¶9

W/O.M.G.SADANANDAN, MUNDAYOOR VALAPPIL (H) PERAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA SRI.K.D.SREEVISAKH

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

THRISSUR CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE THRISSUR-680001.

¶13

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT THRISSUR CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001.

¶14

R BY SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATION

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 1644 of 2015 (E)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶19

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 6.12.2014 IN FILE NO.KKY/BA.2014-15 ISSUED BY 2NS RESPONDENT.

¶20

EXHIBIT-P1(A): TRNASLATION OF EXHIBIT-P1.

¶21

EXHIBIT-P2: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶27

= = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.1644 of 2015

¶28

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of February, 2015

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

In the light of the ratio laid down in Nasar P.K. and Others v. Malappuram Municipality (2009(3)KHC 35), the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same lines, applying the ratio laid down by the learned Single Bench in the said decision, thereby quashing Ext.P1.

¶31

Consequently, the first respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioners 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 six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶32

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE

¶33

M.G. Sadanandan v. Thrissur Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.G. Sadanandan v. Thrissur Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Stanslaus Xavier T.M. Vs Shri. C.v.Nandan

Gireesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Rosy George Vs State of Kerala

E.K.Abdul Khader Vs the Kunnathunadu Grama Panchayat

Nagaraj Vs State of Kerala

E.Thankappan Vs State of Kerala