As per Ext.P2, the 1st respondent has rejected an application for building permit submitted by the petitioner. The reason stated is that, the petitioner's property falls within the paddy field zone. It is also stated that, the land is likely to be acquired for a proposal to widen the road to which the property abuts.
2. According to Adv.Sri.T.C.Suresh Menon who appears for respondents 1 and 2, the proposal to widen the road is being proceeded with, seriously and therefore, the land of the petitioner is likely to be acquired for the purpose. However, it is not in dispute that no proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act have been initiated in respect of the property yet.
3. The above being the position, the petitioner's application has to be considered on the merits. Since no proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act have been initiated, there is no impediment in considering the petitioner's application. As and when proper proceedings are initiated for acquisition of his land, the Municipality can take necessary action.
In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. Ext.P2 is set aside. The 1st respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application afresh in the light of the dicta laid down by this Court as W.P.(C) No.24638 of 2014 2 well as the Honourable Supreme Court on the point and to pass appropriate orders in the matter, 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.
AV