(1.) The petitioners challenge Ext.P8, whereby, their request contained in Ext.P7 has been rejected.
(2.) The petitioners were issued a building permit for a multi-storeyed apartment complex. They had to leave free space at the request of the Corporation since the land abuts a public road. That public road is essentially a national highway. The National Highway authorities have cleared the proposal. Thus what remains with the petitioners for putting up the building is a large plot, of which, a portion has to be left without any construction in the front. The request of the petitioners that led to the impugned order was for permission to utilise the space available in the front, which is the space left off without construction, as parking space. The impugned order is issued on the premise that the FAR was fixed on the basis of the available land and cannot be modified.
(3.) Rule 34(2) of Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 provides that "for buildings of different occupancies, off-street parking spaces for motorcars shall be provided within the plot as specified in Table 5". Adverting to Rule 2(bm), 'road' means everything stated therein, including a road which is existing or proposed in any scheme. While no modification is sought for in the floor area ratio, it has to be noted that the provision for parking area can be anywhere within the plot. That need not necessarily be within, the plinth of the building. Rule 2(bg) defines 'plot' to mean a parcel or piece of land enclosed by definite boundaries. Therefore, it is sufficient that parking space is provided within the plot. In that view of the matter, the FAR of the building, as covered by the building permit issued already, has no bearing on the determination of the question as to whether the land available with the petitioners within the plot could be utilised for the purpose of parking space in terms of Rule 34(2) of the K.M.B.R. The reason contained in the impugned Ext.P8 is, therefore, unsustainable being contrary to the legal provision.