SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13086

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SASIKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 6562 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.K.I.SAGEER, SRI.MUHAMMED YASIL, SHRI.SURYANATH S., SHRI.SAIFUDHEEN K.P.
For the Respondents: GP SMT DEEPA V

Court directed the timely consideration of building permit applications by local authorities.

Headnote:Writ petition filed seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to consider a building permit application and dispense with the requirement of translation for vernacular documents. The court determined that the petitioners' request for directions to expedite consideration of the application was reasonable and allowed the petition. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P2 and make a decision within two weeks of receiving a certified copy of the judgment.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek expedite consideration of a building permit. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court hears petition and considers procedural merits. (Para 3)
3. court mandates timely consideration of applications. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

i) “Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, direction or order directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 application thereon within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court;

ii) To dispense with filing of translation of vernacular documents in the interest of justice.

iii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case.” [sic]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P2 building permit by the 3rd respondent.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader. The manner in which this writ petition is going to be disposed of, no notice is necessary to respondent Nos. 2 and 3. If respondent Nos.2 and 3 are aggrieved by any of the directions issued by this Court, they are free to file a review petition before this Court.

4. Since the limited prayer of the petitioners is to consider a building permit application submitted by the 3rd respondent, there can be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the same.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :

1) The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P2, if it is received and pending as on today and pass appropriate orders in it, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top