Partly allowed

Edit Kumar v. Kannadi Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC6 Jan 2020RP/1252/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a review petition applying a limited liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent Panchayat for a provisional building number and trade licence, subject to ongoing orders from the Revenue Divisional Officer regarding compliance with the Paddy Land Act.

What did the court decide?

Allowed liberty to approach the Secretary for provisional building number and Trade Licence within one month, subject to RDO orders.

Edit Kumar Vs Kannadi Grama Panchayat — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 16TH POUSHA, 1941

¶5

RP.No.1252 OF 2019 IN WP(C) 28328/2019

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 28328/2019(M)

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER:

¶8

EDIT KUMAR, S/O. LATE P.A.VASU, PONGANAMKADU HOUSE, P.O.KURICHIKARA, THRISSUR

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.SABINA JAYAN

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

KANNADI GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANNADI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 701

¶12

SRI.P.R.VENKETESH-SC

¶13

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

RP.No.1252 OF 2019 IN WP(C) 28328/2019

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a review of the judgment, dated 29.10.2019, to a very limited extent, seeking that the respondent - Panchayat be directed to issue the construction in question a provisional building number, until the exercise as ordered to be done by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) is completed.

¶18

According to the petitioner, the building in question has been used as a small restaurant in the past and that the only reason now cited by the Panchayat in not granting a building number for additional construction is that it has been constructed in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short, 'the Paddy Land Act'). The petitioner says that, as has been ordered in the judgment, he is willing to approach the RDO under Section 27A of the Paddy Land Act but prays that until such time as the said Authority passes an order on the said application, the respondent - Panchayat may be directed to issue a building number to the construction in question.

¶19

Sri.P.R.Venkatesh, the learned standing counsel for the

¶20

RP.No.1252 OF 2019 IN WP(C) 28328/2019

¶21

¶22

respondent - Panchayat submitted that since the petitioner has already been directed to approach the RDO, no further orders are required in this writ petition, particularly because if the petitioner is able to convince the Secretary that the construction in question is confined to the area which is not hit by the rigor of the Paddy Land Act, the numbering of the building as also grant of licence to the business conducted therein can be considered. He says that he does not stand in the way of this liberty being reserved to the petitioner.

¶23

Taking note of the afore submissions and since the petitioner affirms that the construction in question has been made in an area which is not hit by the rigor of the Paddy Land Act, I order this petition to the limited extent of allowing the petitioner to approach the Secretary of the respondent - Panchayat with an appropriate application for provisional numbering of the building and for issuance of Trade Licence to the business sought to be carried on by him, which shall then be considered by the said Authority in terms of law and subject to orders to be issued by the RDO in terms of the judgment.

¶24

I make it clear that if the petitioner is able to satisfy the

¶25

RP.No.1252 OF 2019 IN WP(C) 28328/2019

¶26

¶27

Secretary that he has complied with all necessary requirements in law, the said Authority will be at liberty to grant a provisional building number as also a Trade Licence to the petitioner, subject to the orders to be issued from the RDO, on condition that the petitioner approaches the said Authority, as per the directions in the judgment, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Stu

Edit Kumar v. Kannadi Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Edit Kumar v. Kannadi 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

Kuruvila Kuruvila Vs the Secretary Kottayam Municipality

Ushakumari Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Ratheesh a Vs State of Kerala

Lakshmi Vs Yatheendradas

K.D.Poulose Vs Nayarambalam Grama Panchayath

Mooliyil Viswanathan Vs the Kannur Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.