IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
VINIL P – Appellant
Versus
PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Heard T.C.Suresh Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Binoy Vasudevan, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality.
2. The prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondent Municipality to consider his request for a revised building permit, which has not been considered by the Municipality.
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality, on the basis of instructions received, submits that the Municipality is ready to consider the application on the basis of the revised Master Plan. The learned counsel for the petitioner also adds that the Municipality has already taken a decision to relax the restrictions.
4. In view of the afore, this writ petition would stand disposed of, directing the Secretary of the respondent Municipality to take note of the petitioner’s application for revised building permit and to take a decision thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of eight weeks. Needless to say, the petitioner shall also be granted an opportunity of being heard.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.