Disposed

Murali T.G v. Vettom Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC3 Nov 2022WP(C)/17355/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Court directed joint site inspection by respondents to ascertain the road width access to the petitioner's proposed LPG godown under Rule 28 of Kerala Panchayat Building Rules before numbering the building.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents 1 and 4 to conduct joint inspection within two weeks to ascertain road width compliance; if satisfied, number the building within two weeks thereafter.

Murali T.G Vs Vettom Grama Panchayath — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 17355 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

MURALI T.G AGED 52 YEARS S/O. GOPALA IYYAR, MODERN HOUSE, TRIKANDIYOOR POST, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676104

¶7

BY ADVS. M.MUHAMMED SHAFI T.RASINI AYISHA AFRIN A.V.K.

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 VETTOM GRAMA PANCHAYATH VETTOM P.O., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY , PIN - 676102

¶10

2 THE SECRETARY VETTOM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VETTOM P.O., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT , PIN - 676102 3 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE MALAPPURAM , PIN - 676505 4 THE REGIONAL FIRE OFFICER OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL FIRE OFFICER, FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICES PALAKKAD , PIN - 678001 5 THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , PIN - 695033

¶11

W.P.(C) No.17355 of 2022 2

¶12

6 THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNING OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER, MALAPPURAM P.O., PIN - 676505 7 THE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION PANAMPALLY NAGAR, KOCHI. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF AREA MANAGER, PIN - 682036 BY ADVS. C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR K.JOHN MATHAI JOSON MANAVALAN KURYAN THOMAS PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM RAJA KANNAN

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P.(C) No.17355 of 2022

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner proposes to start an L.P.G distributionship of 7^th respondent - Indian Oil Corporation at Tirur. Though, the petitioner completed the construction of LPG storage godown, the same is not numbered by the Panchayat raising the objection that the minimum width of access to the building in terms of Rule 28 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules is not available at the point entering the building. The 1^st respondent relies on Ext.R1(a) report of the Assistant Engineer to contend that the road leading to the building of the petitioner is not having 7 meters width at all points.

¶18

Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the road in front of the petitioner's building is having a width of 7 meters.

¶19

In view of the rival contention, there will be a direction to respondents 1 and 4 to conduct a joint

¶20

W.P.(C) No.17355 of 2022 4

¶21

inspection of the site where the petitioner proposes to set up the L.P.G godown to ascertain whether width of access to the building of the petitioner satisfies the requirement as per Rule 28 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules. The joint inspection shall be done with notice to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Based on the said inspection, further proceedings shall be initiated by the 1^st respondent - Panchayat on the application of the petitioner for numbering the building. If the width of the road satisfies the requirement as provided under Rule 28, the 1^st respondent shall number the building within two weeks thereafter.

¶22

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶23

Sd/MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶24

¶25

W.P.(C) No.17355 of 2022

¶26

¶27

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17355/2022

¶28

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶29

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 12.10.2016
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 08.06.2020
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE DEED DATED 22.07.2021
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 20.12.2021
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.2021
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE NOC ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.09.2021
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 07.09.2021
Exhibit P8	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PESO DATED 18.04.2022
Exhibit P9	TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08.12.2021
Exhibit P10	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.04.2022
Exhibit P11	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29-04-2022
Exhibit P12	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 09.05.2022

¶30

W.P.(C) No.17355 of 2022

¶31

¶32

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.05.2022

¶33

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

¶34

EXHIBIT	R1(a) The true copy of the report of Assistant
	Engineer LSGD Section, Vettom Grama
	Panchayath dated 15.06.2022
EXHIBIT	R4(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE NOC VIDE
	NO.D.1495/2022DATED 13.04.2022
EXHIBIT	R4(B) TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE
	PETITIONER FOR THE PURPOSE OF INITIAL NOC

Murali T.G v. Vettom Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murali T.G v. Vettom Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Abdul Razak Vs State of Kerala

A.Nazarudheen Vs Satheesh

P.K.Baby, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Mohanan Vs the District Collector

Saju George, Vs the Additional District Magistrate

Rabiya Kattayath Thazhath Vs the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions