Dismissed

Rajesh J.Pai v. Assistant Executive Engineer

Kerala HC24 Nov 2020WP(C)/21995/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an order denying a special water connection for a two-storied building due to exceeding 500 Sq.Mtr. plinth area. The court found the action compliant with Section 38A of the Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1986 and dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition seeking directions for immediate allotment of water supply and quashing of proceedings was dismissed.

Rajesh J.Pai Vs Assistant Executive Engineer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

WP(C).No.21995 OF 2020(Y)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1942 WP(C).No.21995 OF 2020(Y)

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 RAJESH J.PAI AGED 45 YEARS S/O (LATE) JAYACHANDRA PAI, RESIDING AT SALYGRAM, KARSHAKA ROAD, KOCHI-682 016.

¶9

2 NEETHA RAJESH, AGED 40 YEARS W/O RAJESH J PAI, RESIDING AT SALYGRAM, MARKET ROAD, KOCHI-682 016.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW SEBASTIAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SECTION 3, WATER WORKS, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PALLIMUKKU, KOCHI-16.

¶13

2 KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, JALA BHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 033.

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL,SC,KWA

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.21995 OF 2020(Y)

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Dated this the 24^th day of November 2020

¶21

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

¶22

I. An order or certiorari or any other appropriate order or direction, quashing Ext.P3 order and Ext.P7 proceedings of the 1^st respondent and order the 1^st respondent to allot water supply to the building of the petitioners forthwith.

¶23

The petitioners are in possession of 2.78 Ares of land.

¶24

They had applied for permit for construction of a two storied building for conducting a lodging in the said land. Permit was obtained for construction of 524.71 Sq.Mtrs building. The petitioners had applied for water connection to the 1^st respondent after completion of the building. The respondent Water Authority had as per Ext.P3 letter informed the petitioners that since the plinth area is more than 500 Sq.Mtr., water connection is to be obtained from pipeline having dimension of 150mm or more, ie. by special line, from Common Street Main Extension (CSME) water connection. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it would be very inconvenient for the petitioners to get such connection, I find that water connection can be granted only in accordance

¶25

WP(C).No.21995 OF 2020(Y)

¶26

with rules and in the present case the action of the respondents

¶27

are in accordance with Section 38A of the Water Supply and

¶28

Sewerage Act, 1986.

¶29

The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA

rkc

JUDGE

WP(C).No.21995 OF 2020(Y)

¶35

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY ISSUED FRO MUNICIPAL	OF THE M ZONAL CORPORATIO	PERMIT DATED 25.11.2016 OFFICE, VYTTILA, KOCHI N
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY DATED 1.10 FROM THE VYTTILA ZO	OF THE .2019 ISS KOCHI NAL OFFICE	OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE UED TO THE PETITIONERS MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY ISSUED BY	OF THE 1ST RESPON	ORDER DATED 17.3.2020 DENT
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY 17.5.2020 RESPONDENT	OF THE GIVEN BY	REPRESENTATION DATED PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY IN WPC NO	OF THE J 16423/2020	UDGMENT DATED 18.9.2020
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY 24.8.2020	OF THE TO THE 1ST	COVERING LETTER DATED RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY ISSUED BY	OF THE MI THE 1ST RE	NUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS SPONDENT DATED 4.9.2020
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY 15.9.2020 RESPONDENT	OF THE SENT BY	REPRESENTATION DATED PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY DATED 1.01 THE 1ST RE	OF THE .2020 GIV SPONDENT	AFFIDAVIT/UNDERTAKING EN BY PETITIONERS BEFORE

Rajesh J.Pai v. Assistant Executive Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh J.Pai v. Assistant Executive Engineer

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

John K. Thomas Vs Divisional Forest Officer

Murukan Nair.K Vs State of Kerala

Catholic Federation Charitable Society Vs State of Kerala

Lovely Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan O., Vs State of Kerala

Anvardeen.K Vs Union of India