Disposed

Muhammed v. Vallathol Nagar Gramapanchayat

Kerala HC18 Sept 2014WP(C)/2070/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, whose building permit was revoked, sought renewal after the original expired. Not appearing were the respondents. The court, noting a Monitoring Committee recommendation favoring construction, directed the respondent to consider the renewal application expeditiously within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be directed to consider renewal application within one month per law and monitoring committee recommendation.

Muhammed Vs Vallathol Nagar Gramapanchayat — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/27TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 2070 of 2014 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

MUHAMMED AGED 55 YEARS S/O.AMMU, CHITTATHAYIL HOUSE, PALLOM P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.) SMT.P.R.REENA

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

VALLATHOL NAGAR GRAMAPANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.VALLATHOL NAGAR THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 531.

¶11

THE SECRETARY VALLATHOL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O.VALLATHOL NAGAR THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 531.

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 2070 of 2014 (G)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶16

P1 : COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DTD.9.3.2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH.

¶17

P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF INSTITUTIONS DTD.21.8.2010.

¶18

P3 : COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE DTD.22.12.2012.

¶19

P4 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.3.1.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A TO JUDGE

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.2070 of 2014

¶25

Dated this the 18^th day of September, 2014

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

Though the respondents have been served with notice through special messenger, there is no appearance for them. Since the matter has been pending from January 2014 onwards, I have heard the counsel for the petitioner.

¶28

The petitioner was issued with Ext.P1 building permit, on the strength of which he started construction of a building. However, the building permit was subsequently revoked by the Panchayat. The petitioner challenged the said action in Appeal No.595 of 2010 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram. By Ext.P2 order, the proceedings issued by the 2^nd respondent were set aside. In the meantime, the petitioner's permit expired. Therefore, he has submitted Ext.P4 on 03.01.2014 for renewal thereof. He complains that no orders have been passed on Ext.P4 till date.

¶29

Since Ext.P4 is pending consideration of the 2^nd respondent, I am satisfied that it shall be sufficient to direct the same to be considered expeditiously. It is also worth noticing that, as per Ext.P3 the Local Level Monitoring Committee has recommended that the petitioner's land is fit for building construction.

¶30

W.P.(C) No.2070 of 2014

¶31

¶32

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and in the light of Ext.P3 and to pass appropriate orders thereon, 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.

¶33

Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.

¶34

Muhammed v. Vallathol Nagar Gramapanchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed v. Vallathol Nagar Gramapanchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahath Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

T.K.Balan Vs Secretary, Mattathoor Grama Panchayat

Rajan Pillai Vs Pandalam Thekkekara Grama Panchayath

K.T Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Sakeer Hussain Vs Pattithara Grama Panchayath

K.G.a.Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala