Disposed
Kiran Raj v. Corporation of Kozhikode
Kerala HCWP(C)/4918/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.VINOD CHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 4918 of 2016 (L)
PETITIONER(S):
KIRAN RAJ, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O RAJARATNAM, 33/6206 A, VALLATHODU VEEDU, P.O. CHEVAYUR, KOZHIKODE-673 017.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUDHISH, SMT.M.MANJU.
RESPONDENT(S):
1. CORPORATION OF KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOZHIKODE-673 032.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020.
3. THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020.
*** ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21/06/2016 IN I.A.NO.9581/2016.**
4. LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, [CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND-AND WETLAND ACT & RULES), REPRESENTED BY CONVENER/DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE KOZHIKODE DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673 004.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU, SC. ADDL. R2 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.J. MANURAJ.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 4918 of 2016 (L)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
rs.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
W.P.(C) No. 4918 of 2016 (L) -----------------------------------------Dated: 2nd December, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved with the rejection of his application for building permit for a residential building as per Ext.P5. The application was rejected on two grounds; one, the property is situated in a Town Planning Scheme titled 'Dream City', and two, the nature of property is 'nilam' in the possession certificate.
W.P.(C) No. 4918/016
-2-
building on the ground that the area was a residential zone. It was noticed that DTP Scheme for Calicut City was notified by the Government in the year 1987 and that there were other commercial buildings in the area. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raju S. Jethmalani v. State of Maharashtra and others - 2005 (11) SCC 222 and this Court in Gopalakrishnan (supra) it was held that the Scheme itself has become redundant and that there are other commercial buildings in the area.
W.P.(C) No. 4918/016
-3-
the Calicut - Wayanad Road. In such circumstance, it is only proper that the 1st respondent consider the building permit application of the petitioner without looking at the DTP Scheme or the reservation made for 'Dream City'; but, however, in accordance with Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 ('KMBR 1999” for short) and verifying as to whether the claim of existence of other residential buildings in the area is correct.
W.P.(C) No. 4918/016
-4-
the additional 4th respondent, as to the lie and nature of the property. On the Revenue Divisional Officer allowing the conversion of user, the petitioner could also approach the village authorities for fresh assessment as 'garden land' as declared in
Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath V. Mariumma - 2015(2) KLT 516 .
Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
jjj 5/12/16
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the building permit application should be considered de hors the 'Dream City' project and DTP Scheme.
Whether the petitioner has a right to challenge the description of property as 'nilam' in the Basic Tax Register.
Whether the petitioner can seek conversion of user or fresh assessment of land character as per KLU Order.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gopalakrishnan v. State of KeralaReferred¶38
Gopalakrishnan v. State of Kerala - 2011 (3) KLT 317
Raju S. Jethmalani v. State of Maharashtra and othersReferred¶41
Raju S. Jethmalani v. State of Maharashtra and others - 2005 (11) SCC 222 · Who else cites this
Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub CollectorReferred¶46
Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector - 2015 (3) KLT 182
Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath V. MariummaReferred¶49
Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath V. Mariumma - 2015(2) KLT 516
KIRAN RAJ
CORPORATION OF KOZHIKODE
K. VINOD CHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court