The High Court in an intra-court appeal dismissed this writ appeal. The bench held there was no legal ground to interfere with the single judge's judgment, noting no error of fact or law was demonstrated regarding the legality of the Government's order permitting a concrete vault cemetery.
The writ appeal was dismissed with no merit found.
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 THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/24TH POUSHA, 1937
WA.No. 1137 of 2015 () IN WP(C).7817/2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7817/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 10-04-2015
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
A.J.BENCHAMIN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. V.C.JOSEPH, ENNAMPRAYIL HOUSE, ULIKKAL P.O. KANNUR DISTRICT, NOW AT ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
SRI.P.PRIJITH
SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, KANNUR-670 001.
3. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE, KANNUR-670 001
4. TAHASILDAR TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR-670 141.
5. ULIKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ULIKKAL P.O. KANNUR-670 705.
6. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, KANNUR-670 003.
7. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD KANNUR DISTRICT OFFICE, KANNUR-670 701.
WA.No. 1137 of 2015
-2-
8. FR.ROBIT PHILIP, VICAR, INFANT JESUS CHURCH ULIKKAL PO, IRITTY VIA, KANNUR-670 705.
R5 BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS BY SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS R1 TO R4 AND R6 AND R7 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.RANJIT R BY SRI. M.AJAY, SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BO
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.1.2016, THE COURT ON 14-01-2016 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &
ANU SIVARAMAN, JJ.
W.A.No.1137 OF 2015
Dated this the 14th January, 2016
JUDGMENT
Anu Sivaraman, J.
The issue raised in this writ appeal is with regard to the establishment of a concrete vault cemetery, which was alleged by the appellant to be in violation of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1998. The appellant had challenged Exhibit P15 order of the Government dismissing an appeal filed by certain other persons against the order passed by the District Collector under Rule 6(7) of the aforementioned Rules. The 8th respondent, Vicar of the Church, had preferred an application before the fifth respondent Panchayath to construct a vault cemetery. The said application was ultimately allowed by the District Collector by Exhibit P13 order granting permission for construction of the vault. This
WA.1137/15 2
was challenged by certain residents of the locality before the Government which resulted in Exhibit P15 order. The appellant, who was not a party before the District Collector or the Government, approached this Court challenging the order of the Government. Adverting to the contentions of the parties, the learned single Judge came to the conclusion that the authorities under the Rules having noticed the contentions and having answered them in terms of the legal provisions, there was no illegality in the order of the Government, which warranted interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned single Judge however proceeded to consider the contentions raised by the writ petitioner/appellant and came to the conclusion that on facts as well, the order of the Government was legal and sustainable.
3
WA.1137/15
record, we find no legal ground made out for interfering with the judgment of the learned single Judge in this writ appeal under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act. All the contentions raised by the appellant against Exhibit P15 order have been examined in detail by the learned single Judge. No error of fact or law has been brought to our notice which would justify interference with the findings of the leaned single Judge in an intra court appeal.
In the above circumstances, we find no merit in the writ appeal. The writ appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
JUDGE
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
vgs
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the single judge's dismissal of the writ petition regarding the construction of a vault cemetery.
Whether there is any legal merit in the writ appeal challenging the Government's order dismissing the appeal of residents.
A.J.Benjamin
The State of Kerala
The District Collector, Kannur
The Additional District Magistrate, Kannur
Tahasildar Taliparamba
Ulikkal Grama Panchayath
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
