The petitioners had applied for the issue of a building permit. By Ext.P3, the application was rejected stating that the area was one that was not demarcated for residential purposes. According to the petitioners, Exts.P1 and P2 are building permits issued to the properties nearby. Therefore, the petitioners have submitted Ext.P5 representation seeking reconsideration of Ext.P3 in the light of Exts.P1 and P2 series building permits. The petitioners seek the issue of appropriate directions for the consideration of Ext.P5. 2. Senior counsel Sri. N. Nandakuamara Menon appears for the respondents.
3. In view of the limited relief sought, I am satisfied that this writ petition can be disposed of directing Ext.P5 to be considered.
4. This writ petition is therefore disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation submitted by the petitioners in W.P.C. No.17238 of 2014 2 accordance with law and in the light of Exts.P1 and P2 series building permits and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of one month of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge