Allowed

Aboobacker Machingal v. Malappuram Municipality

Kerala HC22 Nov 2019WP(C)/8668/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that when a petitioner initiates a purchase proposal under Section 67 after seeking building permissions blocked by future road widening in the Master Plan, the Municipality must consider the proposal within the statutory period. If rejected or undecided, the building permit must be reconsidered de hors the Master Plan within one month thereafter.

What did the court decide?

The competent Authority of the Municipality is ordered to consider the purchase proposal under Section 67 within the statutory period; alternatively, reconsider the building permit application de hors

Aboobacker Machingal Vs Malappuram Municipality — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.8668 OF 2018(G)

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

ABOOBACKER MACHINGAL S/O MAMMU,AGED 56 YRS,MACHINGAL HOUSE,MUNDUPARAMBA,ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY POST MALAPPURAM,PIN-676505, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

2 THE SECRETARY MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY, POST MALAPPURAM,PIN-676505.

¶11

3 THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,PIN-676505.

¶12

R1, R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER GP SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN SRI.E.S.M.KABEER – SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 8668/18

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

¶18

impugning Ext.P3 proceedings of the Secretary of the respondent-Municipality, rejecting his application for building permit, solely on the ground that as per the Master Plan applicable to the Malappuram Town, the road in front of his property has to be widened in future. He says that no action has been taken by the Municipality as per the Master Plan to widen the road and therefore, that his application ought to have been considered.

¶19

Even though the petitioner has made the

¶20

afore averments in the Writ Petition, it is now informed by his learned counsel that he has been advised to make a purchase proposal under Section 67 of the Kerala Town and Country Planning Act ((herein after referred to as 'the Act' for short) and that he has done so, as is evident from Ext.P4 and therefore, prays that

¶21

WPC 8668/18

¶22

¶23

the same be directed to be taken up and

¶24

disposed of at the earliest.

¶25

The learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality concedes that Ext.P4 has been received, but submits that the statutory period for its consideration has not expired. He, therefore, prays that no further orders be issued in this Writ Petition.

¶26

Taking note of the afore submissions that the petitioner himself has preferred Ext.P4 purchase notice under Section 67 of the Act, I deem it appropriate to order the competent Authority of the Municipality to consider the same within the statutory period, as is permitted under the said Act; however,

¶27

clarifying that if the said proposal is

¶28

rejected or no decision is taken within the statutory period, then the Secretary of the Municipality will reconsider his application for building permit de hors the Master Plan, as

¶29

WPC 8668/18

¶30

¶31

expeditiously as is possible, but within a

¶32

period of one month after the statutory period for consideration of Ext.P4 expires.

¶33

This writ petition is thus ordered.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

WPC 8668/18

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT	P1 THE TRUE	COPY OF	THE POSSESSION
	CERTIFIC THE PETI	ATEN ISS IONER BY	UED IN THE NAME OF THE MALAPPURAM
	VILLAGE	OFFICE D	ATED 30.8.2017
EXHIBIT	P2 THE TRUE PROPOSED SURVEY N VILLAGE.	COPY OF COMMERC O.574/4	THE PLAN FOR IAL BUILDING IN OF MALAPPURAM
EXHIBIT	P3 THE TRUE THE 2ND	COPY OF RESPONDE	THE ORDER ISSUED BY NT DATED 11.10.2017.
EXHIBIT	P4 THE TRUE THE 2ND	COPY OF RESPONDE	THE NOTICE ISSUED TO NT DATED 2/11/2019

Aboobacker Machingal v. Malappuram Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aboobacker Machingal v. Malappuram Municipality

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

Salmathul Shamseera, Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Jyothi Krishnan Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rehim Vs the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Biju Jose Vs State of Kerala

St Josephs Convent Vs State of Kerala

Binitha Anilkumar Vs Kandanassery Grama Panchayath