Muraleedharan vs Corporation Of Thrissur
2021 Latest Caselaw 23947 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2021


PETITIONER:

              MURALEEDHARAN, S/O. SHANKARANKUTTY KAIMAL,
              MUTHARAVALAPPIL HOUSE, PARAPPURAM, PANAMUKKU,
              NEDUPUZHA P.O., THRISSUR.

              BY ADV FEBIN J.VELUKARAN


RESPONDENTS:

     1        CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
              THRISSUR 680 001

     2        THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS,
              THRISSUR 680 001

     3        THE DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
              SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, THRISSUR 680 001

     4        THE TALUK SURVEYOR, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS,
              THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR 680 001

              BY ADVs
              SHRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC,
              SMT.SURYA BINOY.SR.G.P.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 25738/21
                                        2



                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner says that even though he preferred Ext.P4

application before the 1st respondent - Corporation of Trissur

seeking a Building Permit to reconstruct his compound wall

abutting a public road, same has not been considered by them

until now, even though, as per Rule 70(5) of the Kerala

Municipality Building Rule (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'

for short), it ought to have been done within 15 days from the

date of application.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Trissur

Corporation - Sri.Santhosh Poduval, answered the afore

submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner - Sri.Febin J.

Velukaran, saying that, unfortunately, Ext.P4 does not appear to

be available on the files of the Corporation and that, therefore, if

the petitioner makes a fresh application, necessary action can be

completed without any avoidable delay. WPC 25738/21

3. Sri.Febin J. Velukaran responded to the afore

submissions saying that his client will make an application

immediately and prayed that the Secretary of the Corporation be

directed to grant his client the requisite permit without any

further delay.

4. Taking note of the afore submissions and since the

petitioner has agreed to make a fresh application before the 1st

respondent, I leave him liberty to do so; and if this is done

within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment, same shall be decided and necessary action

completed thereon, within a period of two weeks thereafter.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

RR                                      DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                                  JUDGE
 WPC 25738/21


                APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25738/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1          TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER PASSED BY

THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12/10/2012.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP 31072/2012 DATED 28/01/2013.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/04/2013.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION PERMIT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT CORPORATION.