Disposed

Ramesh v. the Kodungallur Municipality

Kerala HC23 Aug 2022WP(C)/19069/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the refusal to consider their building permit application due to Master Plan provisions. The court held that since the municipality decided not to acquire the property, it is obligated to process the permit application, directing the respondents to consider the application within two months.

What did the court decide?

The respondents are directed to consider the petitioners' building permit application and take a decision in accordance with law within two months.

Ramesh Vs the Kodungallur Municipality — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 1ST BHADRA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 19069 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 RAMESH AGED 55 YEARS

¶8

S/O. RAVI, THAIVILAYATH HOUSE, KODUNGALLUR P.O.,
THRISSUR - 680 664.

¶9

2VINAYALAKSHMI,
AGED 52 YEARS, W/O. RAMESH, THAIVILAYATH HOUSE,
KODUNGALLUR P.O., THRISSUR - 680 664.
BY ADV P.J.JOSEPH JOHN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1THE KODUNGALLUR MUNICIPALITY
KODUNGALLUR P.O., KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR - 680 664,
REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

¶12

2THE SECRETARY,
THE KODUNGALLUR MUNICIPALITY, KODUNGALLUR P.O.,
KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR - 680 664.

¶13

BY ADV SHRI.K.A.NOUSHAD, SC, KODUNGALOOR MUNICIPALITY,
THRISSUR

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO.19069 OF 2022

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 23^rd day of August, 2022

¶19

The petitioners seek to quash Ext.P2 communication issued by the 2^nd respondent and direct the 2^nd respondent to issue Building Permit dehors the Master Plan, excluding other defects noted by the Municipality.

¶20

The petitioners are owners of 1.66 Ares of property in Kodungallur Municipality. The petitioners submitted application for Building Permit for construction of a commercial building. By Ext.P2, the Secretary to the Municipality stated that the application cannot be considered in view of the provisions of a Master Plan applicable to the Municipality.

¶21

Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Municipality has taken a decision not to acquire the property in question. This Court has held in District Town Planner v. Joby [2020 (6) KLT 600] and District Town Planner,

¶22

WP(C) NO.19069 OF 2022

¶23

3

¶24

Malappuram and others v. Vinod and others [2019 (3) KHC 673 (DB)] that once the Municipality takes a decision not to acquire property, the Municipality is bound to consider Building Permit application.

¶25

Standing Counsel entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel controverted all the material allegations made by the petitioners in the writ petition. However, the Standing Counsel submitted that in a similar writ petition W.P.(C) No.13052 of 2022, this Court has directed the respondents to consider the Building Permit application of the petitioner in the light of the judgments of this Court in District Town Planner (supra) and District Town Planner, Malappuram (supra).

¶26

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is also disposed of directing the respondents to consider the Building Permit application of the petitioners in the light of the judgment of this Court in District Town

¶27

WP(C) NO.19069 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

Planner (supra) and District Town Planner, Malappuram (supra). A decision on the said application shall be taken in

¶30

accordance with law, within a period of two months.

sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C) NO.19069 OF 2022

¶36

¶37

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶39

Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED
09/04/2021 ISSUED FROM VILLAGE OFFICE,
LOKAMALESWARAM.
Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED NIL
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED
07/11/2019 IN W.P. (C) NO. 29004/2019
OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Ramesh v. the Kodungallur Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh v. the Kodungallur Municipality

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

Dr. A.V. Sajeev, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer/ Sub Collector

Dr. Afnas T.P. Vs Dr Y. Lekshmi Sarayu

Yahoo Mk Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Naijin Mathew, Vs State of Kerala

Shaji.K. Vs the District Collector

Wlson S.I Vs Kannur Municipal Corporation