Allowed

Asma N.A v. Kaiparambu Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC8 Aug 2022WP(C)/11980/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a purchaser of a small plot from a larger landholding, challenged the Panchayat's refusal to consider her regularisation application due to lack of a Development Permit. The Court held that purchasers of small plots from larger holdings are not required to obtain such permits and directed the authorities to process the application upon submission of title deeds and boundary plans.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Panchayat authorities to consider the application for regularisation upon production of a copy of the Title Deed and a Plan showing boundaries of the property, without insisting for a Dev

Asma N.A Vs Kaiparambu Grama Panchayat — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 11980 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONERS

¶6

ASMAN.A
AGED 38 YEARS
D/O.AZEEZ, NEDUMTHAZHATHU HOUSE
AMALA ARCADE, PERAMANGALAM P.O
BY ADVS.
SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL
R.RAJITHA
CHITHRA S.BABU
R.N.SANDEEP

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 KAIPARAMBU GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MUNDOOR P.O THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT – 680541

¶9

2 THE SECRETARY KAIPARAMBU GRAMA PANCHAYAT MUNDOOR P.O THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT- 680 541 BY ADV GANGESH K B – R1 & R2

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

WP(C) NO.11980 OF 2022
 2

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

Dated this the 8^th day of August, 2022

¶14

The petitioner, who purchased a small plot of land out of a larger extent in Kaiparambu Grama Panchayat, is before this Court aggrieved by the refusal of the respondents to consider her application for regularisation of building construction on the ground that the petitioner has not obtained a Development Permit.

¶15

The petitioner states that she purchased a small piece of land having 1.69 Ares in Re-Survey No.109/1-2 of Peramangalam Village. The land was purchased out of 21.970 Cents of land held by the vendor of the land. The petitioner constructed a building in the plot purchased by her and submitted application for regularisation of building construction.

¶16

WP(C) NO.11980 OF 2022

¶17

3

¶18

The petitioner states that the respondents have issued Ext.P1 communication stating that they are not in a position to locate the land. The lay out submitted by the petitioner is not sufficient to identify the land. Land development is going on in the larger extent of property. In the circumstances, the application for regularisation of the building construction cannot be entertained at this stage, stated the Secretary to the Grama Panchayat, as per Ext.P1.

¶19

The petitioner is before this Court stating that this Court has held in Panjal Grama Panchayat, Thrissur and another v. Aneesh P [2022 (2) KLT 653] that when a larger area is divided into various small plots and provided with roads for ingress and egress to purchasers, the Secretary to the Panchayat is not empowered to insist for a Development Permit, when application for Building Permit is submitted by the purchaser of the small extent of the plot.

¶20

WP(C) NO.11980 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

Standing Counsel entered appearance and resisted the writ petition on behalf of the Grama Panchayat. The Standing Counsel submitted that development activities are going on in the larger extent of land, which is still not complete. The petitioner produced a Building Plan for regularisation of the construction already made. The petitioner did not obtain a Building Permit before starting construction. The plan submitted along with the application for regularisation does not disclose the boundaries of the plot precisely. In the circumstances, the respondents are not in a position even to identify the land for the purpose of considering the application for regularisation.

¶23

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶24

It is settled by a number of decisions of this Court

¶25

including the one in Panjal Grama Panchayat (supra) that a person purchasing a small portion of a larger extent of land

¶26

WP(C) NO.11980 OF 2022

¶27

5

¶28

and constructing a house of his own cannot be forced to obtain a Development Permit. The Panchayat authorities can insist for a Development Permit only from the person, who is holding a larger extent of land and who intends to develop the land.

¶29

In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the Panchayat authorities cannot demand a Development Permit from the petitioner, as the petitioner is not developing the land purchased by her. At the same time, for the purpose of considering the application for regularisation of the construction made by the petitioner, it is necessary that the respondents could identify the land properly. The petitioner submits that the petitioner will produce the Title Document and a Plan showing the boundaries of her property before the Panchayat authorities.

¶30

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Panchayat authorities to consider the application

¶31

WP(C) NO.11980 OF 2022

¶32

¶33

for regularisation submitted by the petitioner, on the petitioner producing a copy of the Title Deed and a Plan showing the boundaries of the property. Such application shall be

¶34

considered in accordance with law, without insisting for a Development Permit from the petitioner.

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C) NO.11980 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11980/2022

¶41

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶42

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
04.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1133/2019 OF
MUNDOOR SRO

¶43

EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF SITE MAP OF THE PROPERTY
PURCHASED BY THE PETITIONER

¶44

EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
DATED 02.12.2021 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER

¶45

EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.29276
OF 2021 BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT

¶46

Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLETION PLAN
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT

¶47

Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 26.03.2014
IN WPC 7231/2013 OF THIS HONOURABLE
COURT.

Asma N.A v. Kaiparambu Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asma N.A v. Kaiparambu Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mayakkara Seithalavi Vs Cherukavu Grama Panchayath

Khalid Vs State of Kerala

Ramachandran A.K Vs Kaiparambu Grama Panchayath

Madathara Granites (P) Ltd. Vs District Collector

N M R Siraj Vs Corporation of Kochi

Deepa C Thankappan, Vs Maneed Grama Panchayat