Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Unknown vs Present on 19 December, 2017

Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar

Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, P.B.Suresh Kumar

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT:

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

         MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1940

                          WP(C).No. 32951 of 2017
                        -------------------------

PETITIONER(S)
-------------

1   SINDHU RADHAKRISHNAN
    W/O. P.R.RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 47 YEARS,
    PROPRITOR, SHINES JEWELLARY,
    PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

2   ANIL UMMAN
    S/O. OMMACHAN AGED 47 YEARS,
    PROPRITOR, BOOK STOP, BOOK STALL,
    PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

3   REEJA.T.K
    W/O. RATNAKARAN AGED 46 YEARS,
    PROPRITOR, SKY BEAUTY CARE,
    PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

4   JOHN THOMAS
    S/O. THOMAS, AGED 52 YEARS, MANAGER,
    STEPS BAKERS, PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR
    PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

5   JAYA THILAKAN
    S/O. PADMANABHAN, AGED 65 YEARS,
    PROPRITOR, THILAK STUDIO,
    PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

6   P.K.JACOB
    AGED 67 YEARS, MANAGER, KARUNYA MEDICALS,
    PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

7   SABICHAN KURIAKOSE
    S/O. KURIAKOSE, AGED 26 YEARS,
    BRANCH MANAGER OXYGEN DIGITAL SHOP,
    PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
    PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523
  WP(C).No. 32951 of 2017
-------------------------
8     V.J.THOMAS
      S/O.JOSEPH AGED 54 YEARS,
      PROPRITOR, PONNIYIL FLOWER STORE,
      PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN. ADOOR PO.,
      PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

9    P.A.MATHEWS
     S/O. P.A.ALEXANDER AGED 69 YEARS,
     PUNTHALA JO VILLA, PUNTHALA SHOPPING CENTRE KSRTC JN.
     ADOOR PO.,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

        BY ADV.SRI.K.K.SETHUKUMAR

RESPONDENT(S):
-------------

        1.   ADOOR MUNICIPALITY
             REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
             ADOOR PO. PATHANAMTHITTA DT. 691523

        2.   THE SECRETARY
             ADOOR MUNICIPALITY ADOOR PO.,
             PATHANAMTHITTA DT.691523

        3.   THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ROADS)
             PWD ROADS, ADOOR, ADOOR PO.,
             PATHANAMTHITTA DT.691523

        4.   THE DEPUTY SUPERINTEND OF POLICE
             ADOOR, ADOOR PO.,
             PATHANAMTHITTA DT.691523

        5.   THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
             ADOOR, ADOOR PO.,
             PATHANAMTHITTA DT.691523

 *ADDL.R6.    ABU BACKER, AGED 65 YEARS,
              ATH'S PALLIPARA, KANNAMKODU ADOOR, PIN - 691 523

 *ADDL.R7.    ABDUL DALAM, AGED 55 YEARS
              ZAMZAM MANZIL, KANNAMKODU ADOOR, PIN - 691 523

* ADDITIONAL R6 AND R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 19.12.2017 IN
I.A.NO.17352/2017

       ADDL 6,R7 BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH
       ADDL 6,R7 BY ADV. SRI.K.ARJUN VENUGOPAL
       ADDL 6,R7 BY ADV. SMT.MARY RESHMA GEORGE
       ADDL 6,R7 BY ADV. SMT.V.A.HARITHA
       ADDL 6,R7 BY ADV. SMT.P.M.MAZNA MANSOOR
       R3 TO R5 BY ADV.SRI. PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
       R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.K.SHAJ

    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-04-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 32951 of 2017 (T)
-----------------------------

                                     APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1:      TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.01/11614111769 DATED
                 22.03.2017 OF PAYMENT OF LICENSE RENEWAL FEE
                 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2:      TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.656(16-17) DATED
                 13.03.2017

EXHIBIT P3:      TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.01/11614111390 DATED
                 09.032017 OF PAYMENT OF LICENSE RENEWAL FEE

EXHIBIT P4:      TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.316(17-18) DATED
                 12.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P5:      TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.01/11614109309 DATED
                 11/02/2017 OF PAYMENT OF LICENSE RENEWAL FEE
                 ISSUE DBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P6:      TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.720 IN THE FILE
                 NO.H1-6165/08 DATED 07.10.2008

EXHIBIT P7:      TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.1444 IN THE FILE
                 NO.H1-6897/2017 DATED 11.09.2017

EXHIBIT P8:      TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.01/11514110866 DATED
                 24.02.2016 OF PAYMENT OF LICENSE RENEWAL FEE
                 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P9:      TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.BA
                 NO.302/89-90 DATED 06/01/90 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
                 RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P10:     TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 12.08.2017

EXHIBIT P11:     TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AND THE PERMIT ORDER
                 NO.DB-GL 138/08/DATED 14.08.2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
                 RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P12:     PHOTOGRAPHS    SHOWING     THE   UNAUTHORISED
                 VENDING IN FRONT OF THE SHOP BY OBSTRUCING THE
                 INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE SHOP AND DISTURBING
                 THE PASSNGERS

EXHIBIT P13:     TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.10.2017
                 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 8 TO 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P14;     TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
                 05.10.2017 FILED BY THE 9TH PETITIONER TO 2ND
                 RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P15:     TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.8300/2017 DATED
                 05.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY
 WP(C).No. 32951 of 2017
-------------------------

EXHIBIT P16:   TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.8301/17 DATED
               05.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY

EXHIBIT P17:   TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF OF HE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE
               3RD RESPONDENT DATED 05.10.2017 BY THE
               PETITIONERS 1-8

EXHIBIT P18;   TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE
               3RD RESPONDENT DATED 05.10.2017 BY THE 9TH
               PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P19:   TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE
               3RD RESPONDENT DATED 05.10.2017 BY THE 9TH
               PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P20;   TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE
               4TH RESPONDENT DATED 05.10.2017

EXHIBIT P21:   TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE
               4TH RESPONDENT DATED 05.10.2017

EXHIBIT P22:   TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.863/DP/17/ASD DATED
               05.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P23:   TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.864/DP/17/ASD DATED
               05.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P24:   TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 05.10.2017
               GIVEN TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT BY PETITIONER 1-8

EXHIBIT P25:   TRUE COPY    OF   THE   RECEIPT   SNO.1269/17     DATED
               O5.10.2017

EXHIBIT P26:   TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.1270/1705/10/2017
               ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT


RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL
----------------------

                                                 //TRUE COPY//



                                                 P.A.TO JUDGE


nkr

                    P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
                 --------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C).No.32951 of 2016
       ---------------------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 31st day of October, 2017


                          JUDGMENT

Ext.P2 notice, by which the petitioners have been informed by the respondent Municipality that the application preferred by them for grant of building permit cannot be considered, is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality.

3. The impugned notice is issued on the ground that the request made by the petitioners cannot be considered in terms of the sanctioned master plan W.P.(c).No.32951 of 2016 :2: referred to therein. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality submits that the Municipality is in the process of revising the master plan and a draft of the revised master plan has already been published.

In the light of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality, Ext.P2 notice issued to the petitioners is quashed and the Municipality is directed to consider the application submitted by the petitioners for building permit afresh, having regard to the revised master plan. This shall be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE rsr