Allowed

Suneer v. Ulliyeri Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC2 Feb 2016WP(C)/2246/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that categorization as paddy land in revenue records does not bar building permit applications. An order quashing the rejection was issured as the rejection was based on reasoning from a previosuly disposed nearby writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting the building permit application is quashed and the matter remitted to the respondent Panchayat to pass fresh orders within one month.

Suneer Vs Ulliyeri Grama Panchayath — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/13TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 2246 of 2016 (E)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUNEER, AGED 37 YEARS S/O.MAMMEDKOYA, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, P.O.ULLIYERI KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.P.SUDHEER SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

ULLIYERI GRAMA PANCHAYATH ULLIYERI PO, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 620 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.P.R.SREEJITH SRI.M.PROMODH KUMAR

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 2246 of 2016 (E)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶16

P1TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED REGISTERED AS DOC. NO. 1027/14 DATED 26.4.2014 OF NADUVANNUR SRO

¶17

P2TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.A3-5954/15 DATED 12.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT

¶18

P3TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS (2 NOS.) OF THE PROPERTY

¶19

P4TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 28.10.2015 ISSSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ULLIYERI

¶20

P5TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 03.8.2015 IN WP(C) NO.22482 OF 2015 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS :- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE.

DCS

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶26

W.P.(C). No. 2246 OF 2016

¶27

---------------------------------------- Dated this the 02nd day of February, 2016

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The issue is covered by Ext.P5 judgment in W.P.(C). No.22482/2015 in relation to a property situate nearby. The property has not been included in the data bank as reflected by Ext.P4 certificate issued by the Village Officer. Ext. P3 photographs show that there are buildings around and the property has been described as a re-claimed land in Ext.P1 sale deed.

¶30

The mere fact that the property has been categorised as paddy land in some of the revenue records is no reason to decline the building permit applied for. The reasonings in Ext. P5 judgment in relation to the nearby property will govern the present writ petition also. Ext.P2 order rejecting the application for building permit is accordingly quashed and the matter is remitted to the respondent Panchayat.

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 2246 OF 2016 2

¶32

The respondent Panchayat will pass orders anew

¶33

in the application for building permit after notice to the petitioner in the light of the observations above within a period of one month from today.

¶34

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶35

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶36

DCS

Suneer v. Ulliyeri Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suneer v. Ulliyeri Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alex Itticheriya Vs M.G.Rajamanickam

Mohammedkutty Vs Thirunavaya Grama Panchayath

M.v.Aneesh Vs the Rta, Wayanad

Jolly P.Antony Vs Sivasankar IAS

Girish G Krishnan Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Sruthina N Vs M.G.University, Rep. by Vice Chancellor