Stanley Rapheal vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 6074 Ker

Kerala High Court

Stanley Rapheal vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2024

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
    FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 39198 OF 2015


PETITIONERS:

    1     STANLEY RAPHEAL
          AGED 36 YEARS
          S/O.RAPHEAL, PALLISSERY, THRISSUR - 680 026.
    2     DHANYA STANLEY
          AGED 33, W/O.STANLEY, PALLISSERY, THRISSUR - 680 026.
          BY ADV SRI.K.DILEEP


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF
          GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
    2     THE PARALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
          REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.AMMADAM, THRISSUR - 680 001.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI B S SYAMANTAK, GP
          SRI.P.M.MANOJ - R2




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 39198 OF 2015


                                  2


              P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
        --------------------------------------------
             W.P.(C) No.39198 of 2015
       ----------------------------------------------
    Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2024



                       JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the

following prayers:

"i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P4 and

may be pleased to quash the same.

ii) To pass any such or further orders as the

petitioner may seek and this Hon'ble Court

deem fit to grant." SIC

2. Today, when this matter came up for

consideration, there is no representation for the

petitioners. Ext.P4 is an order of the 2 nd respondent WP(C) NO. 39198 OF 2015

by which a building permit application was not

considered. The learned counsel appearing for the

Panchayath submitted that, his information is that

the petitioners already returned the property to the

original owner. If that be the case, nothing survives

in this case.

Therefore, this writ petition is closed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN nvj JUDGE WP(C) NO. 39198 OF 2015

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39198/2015

PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 12.12.2014 P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 21.5.2014 IN WPC NO.31296 OF 2014.

P3 - A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.3678 OF 2015 DATED 11.2.2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

                    P4 - A TRUE COPY OF       THE ORDER
                    PASSED BY THE SECOND      RESPONDENT
                    DATED 4.4.2015



RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS        :NIL


           //TRUE COPY//    PA TO JUDGE