Appellant challenged the Single Judge's order dismissing a writ petition seeking a building permit for land classified as paddy field. High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Single Judge's finding that the rejection was proper based on the land's status as agricultural property, leaving buyer to seek conversion remedies.
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 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2014/30TH PHALGUNA, 1935
WA.No. 260 of 2014 () IN WP(C).24292/2013
(AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 24292/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 05-11-2013) APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
ABDUL SALEEM, S/O.ALAVI, PULIKKAL HOUSE, MANJERI P.O. MANJERI.
BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:
MANJERI MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MANJERI P.O. MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN: 676 121.
R, BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA, SC, MANJERI MUNICIPALITY
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-032014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K. M. JOSEPH & A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JJ
W.A.No.260 OF 2014
Dated this the 21st day of March 2014
J U D G M E N T
K.M. Joseph, J
The appellant is the writ petitioner. He approached this Court feeling aggrieved by Ext.P8. By Ext.P8, the respondent-Municipality refused to grant building permit on the basis that the land, on which the construction was sought to be made, is shown as paddy land as per the Data Bank. In the writ petition the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
i). to quash Ext.P8 by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order ;
ii). to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondent to allow the petitioner's application for building permit in the light of the dictum laid down by this Honourable Court in the decision reported in 2010 (2) KLT 617, 2009 (3) KLT 899 ad 2012 (1) KLJ 607 and taking into consideration the present state of affairs now prevailing in the area in question, irrespective of description of the property in the revenue records.
condition of the land has been ascertained and found to be a
paddy field. It also appears to be found that the Municipality had recommended the petitioner's land for
W.A. No.260/2014 2
conversion in the year 2005. However, the Municipality was not the competent authority under the Land Utilisation Order to grant the conversion, the District Collector being the authority. Ext.P4 was forwarded to the Collector. The Collector has not taken any decision. The petitioner's application for conversion has not been allowed. Therefore, the property continued as paddy land. In the impugned judgment it is also stated that the Secretary of the local body conducted inspection on 8/4/2013 and the present condition of the land has been ascertained and found to be paddy field. It is found that the Secretary of the respondent - Municipality has called the report from the Agricultural Officer. The report is to the effect that the property is a paddy field. It is further found that Ext.P9 shows that the property has been found to be one covered by the provisions of Act 28 of 2008. The rejection of the building permit sought by the appellant by Ext.P8 was found to be proper. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to move the competent authority under the said Act and to seek permission for conversion of his land.
W.A. No.260/2014
3
learned Single Judge. However, in view of the submission of
the learned counsel for the Municipality that the land in question has been included in the draft data bank as paddy land, we leave it open to the appellant to seek all remedies available to him in law.
With the above observation, the writ appeal is disposed
of.
Sd/-
K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE .
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.
Dpk.
/true copy/ PS to Judge.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Single Judge's dismissal of the writ petition regarding the refusal of a building permit on land shown as paddy field.
ABDUL SALEEM
MANJERI MUNICIPALITY
K.M. JOSEPH
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
