JUDGMENT

Introduction:

The petitioners in both the writ petitions claim to reside next to the sixth and the seventh respondent’s property, where the fifth respondent-Corporation intends to establish a retail petroleum outlet. The petitioners assert that the Corporation has been trying to establish the retail outlet with utter disregard to the safety norms and in gross violation of the Building Rules. Has the 5th respondent, a Public-Sector Undertaking, been establishing the retail outlet violating the law? 2. Because both the writ petitions raise common issues against the same respondents, I have decided to dispose them of together under a common judgment.

Facts:

3. Respondents 6 and 7 own a piece of property in Nellikode W.P.(C.) Nos. 28370 & 32556 of 2016 -2-

Ward of Kozhikode Corporation. They leased it out that property for 30 years to the 5th respondent, the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., ('the Corporation”) for establishing a petroleum retail-outlet.

4. The sole petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 28370 of 2016 and the three petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 32566 of 2016 are the neighbours: they allegedly live next to the property leased out to the Corporation. These neighbours filed the wr