The main legal point established is the importance of compliance with building rules and regulations, and the necessity to consider directions from relevant authorities in the issuance of building permits.

These writ petitions relate to the grant of a building permit by the Vithura Grama Panchayath to house a petroleum outlet in the property of the party respondent lying within the local limits of the aforesaid Panchayath. The petitioners allege that the said property which was a paddy field was authorisedly reclaimed by the party respondent. They also allege that the building permit was issued by the Panchayath ignoring the directions given by the Chief Town Planner and the same is not in accordance with the revised plan.

W.P.(C)No.25674/2012

2. The First petitioner is a Trust registered for the purpose of administering the affairs of the Vithura Sree Mahadevar Temple. The second petitioner is a local resident and a staunch devotees of the deity in the temple. The petitioners allege that respondents 11 to 14 were proposing to put up a petroleum outlet in a paddy field reclaimed by them unauthorisedly and illegally. When this property was being filled up the 2nd petitioner submitted Ext.P1 representation and another representation before the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned. He got Ext.P2 letter of reply wherein it was stated that the matter has been referred to Police and the Village Officers concerned have been directed to take necessary follow up action. The petitioners alleged that the area wherein the petroleum outlet is proposed by the party respondents is within a distance of 40 meters in the aforesaid temple. According to the petitioners, the offerings in the temple include 'vedi vazhipaadu' also and during festivities in the Temple, 'vedikkettu' is being conducted. They also allege that during the procession held in connection with the festivals 'theevettis' are being used. Therefore, the first petitioner submitted a representation to the 4th respondent praying that the petroleum outlet may not be permitted in the area which is so close to the temple premises. The 4th respondent called for a report from the 6th respondent regarding the matter, who sent Ext.P3 Report to the effect that the petroleum outlet was proposed to be put up in paddy field reclaimed two years back and that a petroleum outlet in the locality might be dangerous especially when gun powder is used for vedi vazhipaadu. The petitioner further alleges that a representation was submitted by the first petitioner on 06.12.2011 to the 10th respondent praying that any orders in the application for permission submitted by respondents 11 to 14 to install a petroleum outlet in the locality be passed only after hearing them also since the petroleum outlet was proposed to be put up in an unauthorisedly reclaimed paddy field and the same would be dangerous as vedi vazhipadu was being offered to the deity in the Temple during festival seasons. However, the 2nd respondent, in the meanwhile, issued Ext.P5 No Objection Certificate for putting up of a petroleum outlet in the said property. Knowing this the first petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation to the first respondent praying that the no objection granted be canceled. The petitioners pointed out that Ext.P6 representation has not been considered so far. They also alleged that no follow up action was taken on Ext.P1 representation. Therefore, respondents 11 and 12 took steps to develop the reclaimed paddy field and put up a petroleum outlet therein. Against this, a Local Action Council was formed by the people of the locality. They also submitted complaints to various authority against the steps taken to put up a petroleum outlet. The petitioners also allege that a high tension electric line is passing over the area where the outlet is proposed to be put up. This according to the petitioners is prejudicial to the safety and security of the people of the locality. The petitioners further allege that the 10th respondent as per Ext.P10 order rejected the application of respondents 11 and 12 for putting up a petroleum outlet on the basis of complaints from the people. The said order was challenged before