Disposed

Akshay v. Kadukutty Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC12 Nov 2018WP(C)/13471/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging provisional orders invoking Rule 18 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 regarding property ownership disputes. The Court directed the Panchayat to finalize proceedings and complete measurements within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to finalize proceedings and measurements regarding the petitioner's property within three months.

Akshay Vs Kadukutty Grama Panchayat — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

AKSHAY,

¶8

S/O.VIJAYAN, KORLAKATHOTTU HOUSE, KALLOOR DESAM, ANNAMANADA P.O., KALLOOR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, CHALAKKUDY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN - 680 741.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.FRANCO T.J.

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 KADUKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KADUKUTTY, PIN - 680 309, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

2 THE SECRETARY, KADUKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KADUKUTTY, PIN - 680 309.

¶13

BY ADV.

¶14

SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO, SC, KADUKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THRISSUR

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018 2

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

¶19

“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ calling for the records leading to Exts.P8 and P9 notices and Exts.P14 and P15 orders and quash the same;

¶20

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P16 explanation preferred by the petitioner and pass orders on merit after affording an opportunity of hearing;

¶21

(iii) Declare that the way alleged in Exts.P8, P9, P14 and P15 are not passing through the property of the petitioner as described in schedule to Ext.P1 assignment deed;

¶22

(iv) To issue such other appropriate writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and just under the circumstances of the case.”

¶23

Petitioner is the owner of an extent of 3.84

¶24

Ares of property situate in Sy.No.2102/2 of Kalloor Vadakkummury village, Thrissur district, within the

¶25

limits of the 1^st respondent Panchayt. Apparently,

¶26

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018 3

¶27

petitioner secured a building permit from the Secretary of the Panchayat. However, in the intervening circumstances, some dispute arose with respect to the property held by the petitioner in connection with a road. Thereupon, Secretary of the Panchayat has issued Ext.P14 order, invoking Rule 18 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 and also Ext.P15, directing the petitioner to file objection and to show cause why action shall not be initiated against the petitioner. It is also stated in Ext.P15 that, since the ownership of the property is doubted, the Panchayat has taken a decision to carry out measurement of the property of the petitioner through the revenue and till such time, petitioner is directed to maintain status quo. It is challenging Exts.P14 and P15, this writ petition is filed.

¶28

A statement is filed by the 2^nd respondent justifying the stand adopted in Exts.P14 and P15.

¶29

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.

¶30

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018 4

¶31

On an analysis of Exts.P14 and P15 it is evident that, they are provisional orders passed, invoking powers conferred under Rule 18 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. Petitioner is also given the opportunity to file suitable objection within 15 days from the date of receipt of Ext.P15 order. According to the petitioner, suitable objections were filed, evident from Ext.P16, however, in spite of lapse of more than six months, no final decision is taken by the Secretary of the Panchayat and thus constrained, petitioner approached this court by filing this writ petition.

¶32

Having evaluated the situation, I think it is only appropriate that the writ petition is disposed of with suitable directions.

¶33

There will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to finalize the proceedings pertaining to Exts.P14 and P15, taking into account, Ext.P16 objection submitted by the petitioner at the earliest, and at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I also make it clear that ,if the

¶34

Panchayat is intending to proceed with the

¶35

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018 5

¶36

stipulations contained under Ext.P15 by carrying out the measurement of the property of the petitioner, in order to identify whether any public property is enjoyed by the petitioner, the same shall also be completed within the period specified above.

¶37

The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

uu 13.11.2018

¶40

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018 6

¶41

APPENDIX

¶42

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶43

EXHIBIT-P1:	TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.3208/2000 OF ANNAMANADA SUB REGISTRY DATED 13/10/2000.
EXHIBIT-P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 15/05/2017 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLOOR VADAKKUM MURI VILLAGE.
EXHIBIT-P3:	TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 27/03/2017.
EXHIBIT-P4:	TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 03/05/2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P5:	TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN ALONG WITH SKETCH BEARING SEAL AND SIGNATURE OF 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P6:	PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOUSE.
EXHIBIT-P7:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.10.2017.
EXHIBIT-P8:	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/11/2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P9:	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/11/2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P10:	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF ASSET REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P11:	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 02/12/2017.
EXHIBIT-P12:	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/12/2017 IN W.P.(C) NO.40370/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT-P13:	TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT-P14:	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E-4977/2017 DATED 04/01/2018.

¶44

WP(C).No. 13471 of 2018 7

¶45

EXHIBIT-P15: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04/01/2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶46

EXHIBIT-P16: TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 18/01/2018.

¶47

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-

¶48

EXHIBIT R2(a) THE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH SUBMITTED TO DISTRICT COLLECTOR BY VILLAGE OFFICER K.V.MURI VILLAGE

¶49

EXHIBIT R2(b) TRUE COPY OF FORM NO.10 APPLICATION FILED BEFORE TAHSILDAR CHALAKUDY

¶50

EXHIBIT R2(c) TRUE COPY OF LOCATION PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER

¶51

//TRUE COPY//

¶52

P.A. TO JUDGE

Akshay v. Kadukutty Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay v. Kadukutty Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Varghese P.G. Vs Kowsigan a.

Vallamattom Stone Aggregates Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

M/S. United Metal Vs State of Kerala

V. Hassan Haji Vs the Kozhikode Municipal Corporation

C.Pradeep Vs the Kodumbu Grama Panchayat

T.Janardhanan Vs State of Kerala