Disposed
Vinoj v. State of Kerala
Kerala HCWP(C)/17159/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 17159 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
VINOJ
AGED 44, S/O.KUNNINGAL VENU,
MAVELI NAGAR, THRISSUR CORPORATION,
P.O.KURIACHIRA, THRISSUR - 680 006.
BY ADV SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
1THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M O ROAD, THRISSUR - 680 001.3 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, M.O.ROAD, THRISSUR - 680 001.BY ADVS.
SRI.V.N.HARIDAS
SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION
SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN
SRI.ARAVIND V.MATHEW, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.17159 of 2016
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 8th day of July, 2022
Petitioner, owner of an extent of 1.38 ares of property lying in Survey No.573/6-Part of Peringavu Village, has submitted an application before the Secretary of the Thrissur Municipal Corporation seeking the building permit. It was rejected as per Exhibit P2 order dated 17.12.2015 on the ground that the property is situated as per the master plan, in the paddy zone. It is thus challenging the legality and correctness of Exhibit P2 order, this writ petition is filed.
W.P.(C)No.17159 of 2016
3
in the paddy zone as per the master plan.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to pursue any fresh application for building permit in accordance with the new master plan or scheme existing for the area. I also make it clear that the petitioner will be at liberty to seek variation in accordance with section 50 of the Kerala Town and Country Planning Act, 2016 or any interim development orders under section 63 of the Act 2016.
Sd/- Shaji P.Chaly Judge
vpv
W.P.(C)No.17159 of 2016
4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17159/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
P1A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO.2799 OF
2015 DATED 14.07.2015 OF THE THRISSUR SRO.
P2A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT DATED 17.12.2015.
//true copy//
P.A. to Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether adjudication of the i
Whether the petitioner
Whether the writ petition
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Vinoj
The State of Kerala
The Thrissur Municipal Corporation
The Assistant Engineer Thrissur Municipal Corporation
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court