Sathish Murthi v. Member Secretary Art and Heritage Commission Tvm and Others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25142

KERALA HIGH COURT
A. M. Shaffique, J
Sathish Murthi v. Member Secretary Art and Heritage Commission Tvm and Others

Table of Content
1. court's authority to review permits in heritage areas. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. importance of statutory adherence and grounds for appeal. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. final determination of appeals based on merits. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

1. These appeals are filed by the petitioners in WP (C) Nos. 7997 and 14455 of 2014 and the additional 3rd respondent in WP (C) No. 23236 of 2014 respectively against a common judgment, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed WP (C) Nos. 7997 and 14455 of 2014 and disposed of WP (C) No. 23236 of 2014 directing consideration of Ext. P5 therein. For convenience, we shall be referring to the facts and documents that are produced in WP (C) No. 7997 of 2014 against which WA No. 1013 of 2016 is filed.

2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality.

3. Insofar as WP (C) Nos. 7997 of 2014 is concerned, the challenge therein is basically against Ext. P8 building permit obtained by the second respondent from the Palakkad Municipality and Ext. P12 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government. Institutions dismissing the appeal filed against the building permit. In