1. The issue arises for consideration in these matters is common and as such, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. W.P.(C).No.30905 of 2017 is a writ petition instituted challenging Ext.P3 communication of the Secretary of the respondent Municipality, by which the petitioner was informed that the building permit sought by him cannot be granted, as a portion of the property where the petitioner proposes to put up the building is required to be acquired in terms of the sanctioned Town Planning Scheme mentioned therein for formation of a new road.

3. W.P.(C).No.37945 of 2017 is a writ petition instituted challenging Ext.P4 communication issued by the Assistant Engineer of the first respondent Municipality, by which the petitioners were informed that the building permit sought by them cannot be granted as their property referred to therein is earmarked for acquisition in terms of the sanctioned Town Planning Scheme mentioned therein for the development of a bus stand.

4. The case of the petitioners is that in so far as the properties of the petitioners are yet to be acquired for implementing the sanctioned schemes, the building permits sought by them cannot be declin