Thottathan Manoj vs The Mattannur Municipality
2024 Latest Caselaw 16479 Ker

Kerala High Court

Thottathan Manoj vs The Mattannur Municipality on 11 June, 2024

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
   TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 29573 OF 2017


PETITIONER:

             THOTTATHAN MANOJ
             AGED 45 YEARS,
             S/O. GOPALAN @ BALAN,
             PRANAV HOUSE, PARAPPOYIL,
             KALLERIKKARA, MATTANNUR P.O.,
             KANNUR DISTRICT - 670702
             BY ADV SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1        THE MATTANNUR MUNICIPALITY
             AGED 45 YEARS
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
             MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT 670702.
    2        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             KANNUR DISTRICT 670701.
    3        THE CHIEF PROJECT ENGINEER
             KANNUR INTERNATIONAL AIR PORT,
             TOWN OFFICE, MARUTHAI ROAD,
             MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT 670702.
             BY ADVS.
             SMT.DIVYA C.MOHAN
             SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
             SRI.P.GOPINATH
             SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
             SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
             SMT.KRIPA ELIZABETH MATHEWS
             SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
             SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
             SMT.P.F.ROSY
             SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING FINALLY BEEN HEARD ON
11.06.2024,     THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 29573 OF 2017

                                 2


                          JUDGMENT

1. The grievance of the petitioner is that when the petitioner

approached the 1st respondent for issuing Occupancy

Certificate and for numbering of the building, the 1st

respondent insited the petitioner to obtain NOC from the 3rd

respondent on the ground that the 3rd respondent is

proposing to acquire the land.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during

the pendency of the writ petition, building numbers were

allotted to several persons in the area and the same is

revealed by Ext.P5 which is obtained under Right to

Information Act.

4. At any rate, the 3rd respondent has not initiated any steps

to acquire the properties till this date. Hence the 1st

respondent cannot insist NOC from the 3rd respondent for

issuing Occupancy Certificate and for numbering the WP(C) NO. 29573 OF 2017

building after the construction of building.

5. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent

and consider the request of the petitioner for Occupancy

Certificate and Building Number in accordance with law

without inisisting NOC from the 3rd respondent within a

period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment.

6. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE sms WP(C) NO. 29573 OF 2017

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29573/2017

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN.

   EXHIBIT P2        TRUE   COPY   OF  THE     RECEIPT   DATED
                     9/10/2015    ISSUED     BY     THE    1ST
                     RESPONDENT.
   EXHIBIT P3        TRUE   COPY   OF   THE     NOTICE   DATED
                     04/11/2015    ISSUED     BY    THE    1ST
                     RESPONDENT.
   Exhibit P5        IA NO.19275/2017 ACCEPT ADDITIONAL
                     DOCUMENT
   Exhibit P4        IA   NO.4069/2008    ACCEPT    ADDITIONAL
                     DOCUMENT
   Exhibit P5        IA   NO.1925/2017    ACCEPT    ADDITIONAL
                     DOCUMENT
   Exhibit P6        IA   NO.4069/2018    ACCEPT    ADDITIONAL
                     DOCUMENT