PRASAD Vs. VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was issued with a building permit on 18/2/2021 pursuant to which he had completed the construction of the building and applied for occupancy certificate on 28/10/2021. It is submitted that in spite of the passage of 15 days, no defect was intimated to the petitioner and the petitioner became entitled to a deemed occupancy certificate. It is submitted that thereafter, the petitioner again approached the respondents, pursuant to which Ext.P5 communication was issued on 16/3/2022 stating that the petitioner had been intimated of certain defects and therefore, his application for occupancy certificate cannot be considered. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a reading of Ext.P5 itself would show that the application for occupancy certificate was submitted by the petitioner on 28/10/2021. It is further stated that no date is stated for the reference (3) in Ext.P5 and that therefore, the same had not been issued within the statutory period of 15 days and cannot be relied upon.