Abdul Latheef vs Thrissur Municipal Corporation
2021 Latest Caselaw 18793 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
   THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 18TH BHADRA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 18051 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          ABDUL LATHEEF ABOOBACKAR,
          AGED 48 YEARS
          S/O.ABUBACKER, VALIYAKATH, MAMBARAMBATH HOUSE,
          THOYAKKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN:680510,
          REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
          FASAL RAHMAN R.V., S/O R.V.ABDULLAKUTY,
          PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, PALUVAI PO, THRISSUR-680522


          BY ADVS.
          JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY
          ANIL GEORGE


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
          CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR, 680001,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

    2     THE SECRETARY,
          THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL
          CORPORATION, THRISSUR-680001

          SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18051 OF 2021

                                         2


                                 JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

"(i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to consider the renewal application and pass orders on the basis of revised plan submitted by the petitioner.

(ii) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, calling for Exhibit P8 notice and quash the same."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

standing counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

petitioner, who is the owner of 18.42 Ares of property in Sy.No.736/P of

Ayyanthole Village under the jurisdiction of the 1 st respondent, had

submitted an application for Building permit for the construction of an

apartment complex with 18 floors. It is submitted that this Court, by

Ext.P1 judgment, had directed the respondents to consider the

application submitted by the petitioner. Ext.P4 Building permit was

issued to the petitioner on 28.03.2017. However, he could not construct

and complete the building within the validity of the permit. He,

therefore, submitted an application as evidenced by Ext.P5 for renewal

of the permit. Thereafter, the petitioner had submitted a revised plan

limiting the number of floors from 18 to 11 and resultantly limiting the WP(C) NO. 18051 OF 2021

plinth area of the building. The said revised plan was submitted on

27.03.2021 and the petitioner seeks a consideration of the application for

renewal in accordance with the revised plan. The learned counsel for the

petitioner asserts that the revised plan has been submitted for a

residential apartment complex itself and that as such, there is no change

of occupancy and the application for renewal has to be considered along

with the revised plan.

4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents

submits that the telephonic instructions are to the effect that there is a

change of occupancy involved and that the revised plan is for a storage

occupancy.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner immediately submits that

there is no change of occupancy and that the revised plan is specifically

for a multi-storied residential building.

6. Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion

that since the petitioner had submitted an application for amendment of

the building permit as per Ext.P5 and since it is specifically submitted by

the learned counsel that the revised plan is also for an apartment

complex and for residential occupancy and the revision is only to the

effect of reducing the number of floors in the building and the resultant WP(C) NO. 18051 OF 2021

plinth area, I am of the opinion that the application is liable to be

considered in accordance with law. In case there is no change in

occupancy in the revised plan submitted by the petitioner, then the

application for renewal of Building permit is to be considered in

accordance with the revised plan submitted by the petitioner. However,

if the occupancy of the building is changed, then the application may

have to be considered as a fresh application for Building permit.

7. In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on the application

preferred by the petitioner for renewal of Building permit and consider

it along with the revised plan submitted by the petitioner. In case there

is any defect in the revised plan submitted, the same shall be intimated

to the petitioner and the petitioner shall be given an opportunity to

rectify such defect. Appropriate orders shall be passed by the 2 nd

respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE NP WP(C) NO. 18051 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18051/2021

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.07.2015 IN WPC 12835 OF 2015 WITHOUT APPENDIX.

Exhibit P1(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08.10.2015 IN RP NO.802/2015

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIRE SAFETY CLEARANCE DATED 12.08.2016

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO ESTABLISH DATED 11.03.2016 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 28.03.2017

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT RECEIVING THE RENEWAL APPLICATION DATED 27.02.2020

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT FOR REVISED PLAN DATED 27.03.2021 SUBMITTED AS PER THE RULES.

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.08.2021

Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.08.2021

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT FOR A SUM OF RES.15,64,320/- TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS FOR THE ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA RATION(FIR)

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT FOR THE SAID SUM OF RS.15,64,320/-

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL