Disposed

Balu v. Munnar Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC5 Feb 2019WP(C)/2935/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of two connected writ petitions concerning illegal construction and a building permit application. The Court directed the Grama Panchayat Secretary to process the permit application within a month after notice, allowing for the identification of any illegal construction.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to consider the building permit application within a month, serving notice to parties, and to identify any illegal construction.

Balu Vs Munnar Grama Panchayat — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 16TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 26502 of 2013

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

IDA SAROJAM, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O.ROY HESTING, RESIDING AT IDWA HOUSE, OLD MUNNAR, MUKNNAR P.O., K.D.H. VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.D.SAJEEV

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2 THE SECRETARY, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶12

3 S.ARUMUGHAM, AGED 74 YEARS

¶13

S/O.R.SITHIRAN, M.G.P. IX/24, MOOLAKADA, OLD MUNNAR, K.D.H. VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶14

4 BALU,

¶15

S/O.AARUMUGHAM, 12 ROOM LINES, MOOLAKADA, OLD MUNNAR, K.D.H. VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT SUPERINDENTANT OF POLICE, ADDL.5 MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685612

¶17

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADDL.6 MUNNAR POLICE STATION, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685612

¶18

ADDL.R5 & R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.06.2016 IN I.A. NO.9265/2016.

¶19

R1, R5 & R6 BY SRI.MANURAJ.K.J., GP R2 BY SRI. ARUN THOMAS, SC

¶20

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 2

¶21

BY ADVS. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN SRI.M.T.AJITH SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI SRI.BABU PAUL SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.02.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).2935/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 3

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶25

PRESENT

¶26

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶27

TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 16TH MAGHA, 1940

¶28

WP(C).No. 2935 of 2019

¶29

PETITIONER/S:

¶30

BALU, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.ARUMUGHAN, 12 ROOM LINES, MOOLAKKADA, OLD MUNNAR, KDH VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶31

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶32

RESPONDENT/S:

¶33

1 MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNNAR.P.O., MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685584.

¶34

2 THE SECRETARY, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUNNAR.P.O., MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685584.

¶35

3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685584.

¶36

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SC, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT

¶37

R3 BY SRI.MANURAJ.K.J,GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶38

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.02.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).26502/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 4

¶40

JUDGMENT

¶41

These writ petitions are materially connected

¶42

with respect to a construction carried out by the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.2935/2019, and therefore, I heard them together and propose to pass this common judgment.

¶43

The relief sought for by the petitioner in W.P.(C).26502/2013 is as follows:-

¶44

“i) To call for the records connected with the case

¶45

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the 2^nd respondent to issue statutory orders to stop the illegal construction being processed with by the respondents 3 and 4 without getting permit or permission from the Grama Panchayath;

¶46

iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ direction or order directing the 2^nd respondent to issue orders contemplated under Section 235 of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act to stop the construction of the multi-storied building at the instances of the respondents 3 & 4, forthwith since the same is proceeded with without getting permission from

¶47

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 5

¶48

the 2^nd respondent;

¶49

iv) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to take all steps to demolish the illegally constructed multi-storied building by the respondents 3 nd 4;

¶50

v) To grant such other and further reliefs, as deemed fit to be granted by this Honourable Court in the facts and circumstances of the above case.”

¶51

From the tenor and terms of the pleadings put

¶52

forth by the petitioner therein, it is clear and evident that, what is bothering the petitioner is, illegal construction carried out by the petitioner in the other writ petition, who is also the 4^th respondent in the earlier writ petition.

¶53

Now, the 4^th respondent has filed W.P. (C).No.2935/2019, against Ext.P10 order passed by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat dated 07.01.2019, whereby, it is informed to the petitioner that the application for building permit submitted by the petitioner cannot be considered in

¶54

view of the pendency of the connected writ petition.

¶55

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 6

¶56

Having heard respective counsel across the

¶57

Bar and deliberating the issue, I am of the considered opinion that writ petitions can be disposed of with appropriate directions.

¶58

There will be a direction to the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to consider the building permit application submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and attain finality at the earliest possible time, and at any rate, within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after providing notice of hearing and participation to the petitioners in both the writ petitions.

¶59

I also make it clear that, in that process, the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath will be at

¶60

liberty to identify whether any illegal construction is carried out by the petitioner in W.P.(C). No.2935/2019, overlooking the Panchayat Building Rules 2011, and any other orders passed by this court or issued by the State Government with respect to the construction of buildings within the Munnar area.

¶61

The parties are also given the liberty to file any additional representations/objections

¶62

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 7

¶63

along with the documents before the Secretary for appropriate action.

¶64

The writ petitions are disposed of, accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

uu 05.02.2019

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 8

¶70

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26502/2013

¶71

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶72

EXHIBIT	P1	TRUE COPY OF THE NO.301/13 ON THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,	PLAINT IN OI.S. FILE OF THE DEVIKULAM.-
EXHIBIT	P2	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 04.10.2013 HONOURABLE MUNSIF DEVIKULAM.	INJUNCTION ORDER ISSUED BY THE F'S COURT,
EXHIBIT	P3	TRUE COPY OF THE BEFORE THE SUB IN MUNNAR.	REPRESENTATION FILED SPECTOR OF POLICE,
EXHIBIT	P4	TRUE COPY OF THE THE SECRETARY, GR MUNNAR BY THE PET	COMPLAINT GIVEN TO AMA PANCHAYATH, ITIONER.
EXHIBIT	P5	TRUE COPY OF THE 12.10.2013 ISSUED MUNNAR.	COMPLAINT DATED BEFORE THE DY.S.P.
EXHIBIT	P6	TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BEFORE PANCHAYATHS, GOVE	REPRESENTATION THE DIRECTOR OF RNMENT OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT	P7	TRUE COPY OF THE 19.10.2013 FILED INSPECTOR OF POLI	REPRESENTAION DATED BEFORE THE CIRCLE CE, MUNNAR.
EXHIBIT	P8	TRUE COPY OF THE 05.11.2013 IN W.P 2013 OF THIS HONO	INTERIM ORDER DATED .(C) NO.26502 OF URABLE COURT
EXHIBIT	P9	TRUE COPY OF THE (O.P) NO.54/2016 SPECIAL TRIBUNAL	PLAINT FILED IN M.T. BEFORE THE MUNNAR
EXHIBIT	P10	TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED UN 1 OF THE CODE OF	AFFIDAVIT AND DER ORDER XXXIX RULE CIVIL PROCEDURE
EXHIBIT	P11	TRUE COPY OF THE 13.04.2016 IN I.A M.T.(O.P.) NO.54/ SPECIAL TRIBUNAL	ORDER DATED . NO.301/2016 IN 2016 BY THE MUNNAR
EXHIBIT	P12	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 27.04.2016	COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED IN I.A. NO.301

¶73

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 9

¶74

OF 2016 IN M.T. (O.P.) NO.54/2016

¶75

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 16.05.2016 FILED IN I.A. NO.301 OF 2016 IN M.T.(O.P.) NO.53/2016

¶76

EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 10.05.2016

¶77

EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS

¶78

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-

¶79

EXHIBIT R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT AND THE PLAN EXHIBIT R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 13.9.2013

¶80

EXHIBIT R4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT/REGULARIZATION ALONG WITH PLAN FOR APPROVING THE EXTENSION

¶81

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2935/2019

¶82

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶83

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.2.2000 BEARING NO.208/99-2000.

¶84

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.9.2013 BEARING NO.A25114/13.

¶85

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.10.2013.

¶86

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE WRIT PETITION IN WPC.NO.26502/2013. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 5.11.2013 IN WPC.NO.26502/2013. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2.6.2016.

¶87

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE

¶88

WP(C).Nos. 26502 of 2013 & 2935 of 2019 10

¶89

COURT DATED 16.6.2016 IN WPC.NO.26502/2013.

¶90

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 27.6.2016.

¶91

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 7.1.2019.

¶92

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 7.1.2019.

¶93

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL

¶94

//TRUE COPY//

¶95

P.A. TO JUDGE

Balu v. Munnar Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balu v. Munnar 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

Mohammed Shajahan Vs the Nedumpram Gramapanchyath

Deepa Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

M/S.Um Assets Private Limited, Vs the District Geologist

Visakh M.R., Vs Sri.Tom Jose

G.Anandarajan, Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Sonakumari S. Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer