Nizar Noorudheen vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 13603 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

         THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2021 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1943

                        WP(C) NO. 36827 OF 2018

PETITIONER/S:

     1     NIZAR NOORUDHEEN,
           AGED 41 YEARS
           S/O DARUL NOORUDHEENKUTTY, DARUNOOR, KAMPALADI,
           PORUVAZHY, KOLLAM -690 520.
     2     RAMLA BEEVI,
           AGED 65 YEARS
            W/O.DARUL NOORDHEENKUTTY, DARULNOOR, KAMPALADI,
           PORUVAZHY, KOLLAM-690 520.
           BY ADV VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL


RESPONDENT/S:

     1     STATE OF KERALA,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF
           DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
     2     DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH,
           OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
     3     DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH,
           KOLLAM-1.
     4     PORUVAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, AMBALATHUMBHAGAM P.O.,
           KOLLAM-690 520.
           BY ADVS.
           R4 BY SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR
           SRI.R.RENJITH
           R1 TO R3 BY SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER



THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2021,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No. 36827/2018                         :2:




                  Dated this the 1st day of July, 2021.

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following

reliefs:

1. Call for the records relating to Exts. P1 to P9 and issue a writ or

appropriate direction to the 4 th respondent to allow the

regularisation of the building constructed by the petitioners

covered by Exts.P3, P4, P5, P6 and P7.

2. Issue a writ or appropriate direction to the 4 th respondent to

consider Ext. P9 application and take a decision to regularise the

building covered by Ext. P3, P4, P5, P6 and P7.

2. However, today, when the matter is taken up, the learned

counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he may be permitted to

withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one, since certain

material aspects could not be pointed out in the writ petition.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, leaving

open the liberty of the petitioners to file a fresh one, if so advised.

sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

Rv