Appeal against dismissal of public interest litigation challenging the revocation of a building permit and demanded demolition of a multi-storied building constructed under valid permission.
Writ appeal against the order continuing the stay or permitting the enquiry into the building permit cancellation was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930
WA.No. 1740 of 2008() --------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.38047/2007 Dated 27/06/2008
APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS
BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER
M/S.HEERA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE(LIMITED), REP.BY A.R.NAIR, GENERAL MANAGER, HEERA PARK, M.P.AYYAPPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY SRI.ANIL THOMAS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J.B.KOSHY,Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J
W.A.1740/2008
Dated this 14th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT
Koshy (Ag.C.J.)
On the basis of the building permit issued from the Corporation and NOC from the Fire and Rescue Services Department, writ petitioner/Company constructed a multi storied building consisting a residential flats, in the heart of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. The permit was given in the year 2004. According to the petitioner, construction was in accordance with the permit conditions and completion report was duly accepted by the Corporation on 17.4.2006. Ext.P1 is the building permit granted by the Corporation. In terms of Rule 22(c) of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, occupancy certificate ought to have been given within 15 days. But the occupancy certificate was not granted on finding that it was built in a heritage zone. Permit was granted by a Special Committee. It is submitted that the order from the Arts and Heritage Commission was not obtained. It is also submitted that the officers did not point out to the Special Committee that this area was covered under the heritage scheme.
W.A.1740/2008
2
Secretary, who was the Convener of the Special Committee, was absent in the meeting, which decided to recommend to grant the permit, and the Corporation itself granted permit. The building was constructed in the centre of Thiruvananthapuram city and the Corporation officials, on seeing the building constructed, did not take any action. Building was completed in the year 2006. About 28 families have already occupied the building. At this distance of time, after completion of the building, it is not reasonable on the part of the Corporation to say that the officers committed a mistake and therefore, Ext.P1 permit will be cancelled and building should be demolished. Building was not an unauthorised construction at all. It was constructed with permit. There was no misrepresentation of the fact or law. There is no allegation that the construction carried out, will be a threat to life or property. Rule 16 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, reads as follows:-
Suspension and Revocation of permit - Secretary shall suspend or revoke any permit issued under these rules if it is satisfied that
W.A.1740/2008
3
the permit was issued by mistake or that a patent error as crept in it or that the permit was happened to be issued on misrepresentation of fact or law or that the construction if carried out will be a threat to life or property.”
J.B.KOSHY, Acting Chief Justice
V.GIRI, Judge
mrcs
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the revocation of a validly granted building permit on the grounds of officers' mistake or negligence is permissible.
Whether the cancellation of a building permit and demolition of a constructed building is arbitrary when occupants have relied on the permit.
Whether the impugned order regarding the surrender of the building permit should be allowed.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
The Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram
The Secretary, Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram
M/s. Heera Construction Private (Limited)
J.B. Koshy
V. Giri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
