The Court upheld the Tribunal's order requiring procedural fairness in issuing building permits despite zoning designations.

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"(i) Issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P2 and quash the same;

(ii) To declare that the petitioner is duty bound to comply with the provisions contained in the DTP Scheme as well as master plan and that the direction issued by the Tribunal contravenes the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in District Town Planner, Thrissur Vs. Joby .M.C. and Others [2020(6) KHC 455(DB)] as well as Regional Town Planner and Another Vs. Muhammed Rasheed and Others [ 2019(3) KHC 987 ].;

(iii) Issue such other order as this Hon'ble court deems fit and necessary in the facts and circumstance of the case;

(iv) To dispense with the production of translation of Vernacular documents."

[SIC]

2. The petitioner in this case is the Kozhikode Municipal Corporation. The respondents in this case submitted an application for building permit for constructing a commercial building. They are the owners of 7.28 Ares of landed property in Sy. No.1/21/839 and Sy.No.1/21/1/840 of Katchery Village. They filed an application for building permit on 29.06.2021. The same was rejected on 31.08.2021 without conducting any site inspection, is the submission. It was alleged that the property was ear marked as a residential zone and the building exceeding 150m² cannot be permitted in the area. The same was challenged before the Tribunal For Local Self Government Institutions (for short ‘Tribunal’) by filing Appeal No.485/2021. The Tribunal disposed of that appeal as per order dated 10.11.2023 with certain directions. Aggrieved by the same, the Corporation filed this Writ Petition.

3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and the learned Special Government Pleader. 4. This Court perused Ext.P2 order. In Ext.P2 order, the Tribunal only directed to conduct an inspection of the property and thereafter decide whether the building permit is to be issued or not. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of Ext.P2 order:

“8. The respondent has no case that the area has to be compulsorily acquired by the respondent. The zonal restrictions, if any, in a Town Planning scheme does not mean that the area has to be compulsorily acquired by the appellant. There was no contention that the property of the appellant is intended to be compulsorily acquired by the respondent. In the said circumstances, there is no requirement to issue purchase notice to the respondent under Section 67 of the Town and Country Planning Act .

9. The Commissioner's report would reveal that the property situates on the side of the road and existence of several buildings reported. The property is situated on the eastern side of Kozhikode-Kannur (Pavangad - Nadakkavu) road and there is narrow mud road with 7 feet on the northern side of the property. The existence of a large commercial buildings of Reliance Smart Point having 3 floors and basement (having 5000 sq.ft) was reported by the Commissioner adjacent to the property. The respondents representative pointed out to the Commissioner that the 2nd floor and 3rd floor were residential one. The existence of another building "Amal Arcade" on the northern side of the above buildings was also reported. The existence of Suryodayam Restaurant, banks and several shops on the opposite side of the appellant's property were also reported by the Commissioner. Photographs were also produced showing the existence of 3 storied, building, petrol pump and other commercial buildings in the locality having more than 3 stories. The report of the Commissioners and the photographs reveal that several large buildings are existing in the locality.

10. The original file produced cont