Allowed

Ramachandran A.K v. Kaiparambu Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC5 Aug 2022WP(C)/19638/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala set aside a Panchayat's refusal to process a Building Permit application. The Court held that pending civil litigation without an interim bar on construction did not justify withholding the permit and directed the authorities to process the application within one month.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P6 and P13 set aside; respondent directed to process Building Permit application within one month.

Ramachandran A.K Vs Kaiparambu Grama… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

RAMACHANDRAN A.K AGED 50 YEARS S/O. KAMALAVATHI AMMA, RESIDING AT KALAPURAKAL HOUSE, PURANATTUKARA P.O, PURANATTUKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR - 680551.

¶7

BY ADVS. SAMEER M NAIR R.RAJESH (VARKALA) M.KIRANLAL MANU RAMACHANDRAN T.S.SARATH GEETHU KRISHNAN HARSHA SUSAN SAM

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 KAIPARAMBU GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE AT KAIPARAMBU GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, MUNDUR P.O, THRISSUR - 680541, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.

¶10

2 SECRETARY, KAIPARAMBU GRAMAPANCHAYATH OFFICE AT KAIPARAMBU GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, MUNDUR P.O, THRISSUR - 680541. BY ADV GANGESH K B

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 5^th day of August, 2022

¶16

The petitioner, who holds a property at Peramangalam, is before this Court seeking to set aside Ext.P6 and to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's construction of house in Ext.P1 property.

¶17

The petitioner states that he holds 17 Cents of property in Peramangalam. The petitioner submitted an application for Building Permit, which was acknowledged as per Ext.P5. The application was submitted on 26.04.2022. The respondents have refused to entertain the application stating that there is a civil litigation pending in respect of the property and that a complaint has been received not to permit construction. The Secretary to the Panchayat made enquiries and found that there is a civil dispute relating to the property.

¶18

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶19

¶20

Therefore, by Ext.P6, the Secretary informed the petitioner that processing of his application for Building Permit can be done only after conclusion of the civil proceedings.

¶21

The petitioner states that he has purchased the property from a lawful owner. The persons who are disputing the title of the petitioner have approached the Civil Court. The Suit was dismissed and an Appeal was preferred before the Appellate Court. The Appeal was also dismissed. Thereafter, they have approached this Court filing RSA. No interim orders are passed in favour of the appellants in the RSA or against the petitioner. Therefore, refusal on the part of the respondents in processing the application submitted by the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable.

¶22

The petitioner would further contend that he has submitted the application and the Secretary did not act on the application for the next 15 days. Therefore, the petitioner should be deemed to have obtained a Building Permit.

¶23

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶24

¶25

Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondent-Panchayat. The Standing Counsel submitted that as per Rule 14 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019, if the Secretary does not take a decision on an application for Building Permit within 15 days, the applicant has to make a written request to the Panchayat for granting permission. It is only when the Panchayat also fails to take a decision within 30 days that the applicant can be treated as holding a deemed Building Permit. In the case of the petitioner, the petitioner has not made any application to the Panchayat. Therefore, there is no question of deemed Building Permit.

¶26

The Standing Counsel for the respondentPanchayat further submitted that the Panchayat received a complaint from one Kishore Kumar on 04.06.2022, which stated that there is serious dispute in respect of the title to the property including the property held by the petitioner and RSA

¶27

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

Nos.827/2021 and 832/2021 are pending before this Court. Taking into consideration the complaint made, the respondentPanchayat decided not to process the Building Permit application now.

¶30

The Standing Counsel further argued that as long as there is a dispute regarding the title to the property or regarding the boundary of the property, the Panchayat Authorities will not be able to process the Building Permit application in accordance with the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶31

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

¶32

The pleadings and arguments raised at the Bar would divulge that the petitioner has submitted an application for Building Permit on 26.04.2022. It is evidenced by Ext.P5.

¶33

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

The Said Building Permit application has not been processed by the Secretary to the Panchayat on the ground that there is a complaint submitted by a third party regarding the title to the property.

¶36

It is not disputed that the Civil Suit filed against the petitioner by the claimants has been dismissed and the First Appeal also stands dismissed. Though the claimants have filed a Second Appeal before this Court, there is no interim order against enjoyment of the property by the petitioner. Ext.P12 injunction order passed by the Thrissur Munsiff's Court in OS No.1338/2022 on 30.06.2022 would show that the restraint made by the Court was only from making any kind of construction in petition 'B' Schedule property without obtaining a valid Building Permit from the appropriate authority. The interim injunction would show that the petitioner is not barred from applying and obtaining valid Building Permit. Therefore, the respondent-Panchayat are not justified in not processing

¶37

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶38

¶39

the application submitted by the petitioner.

¶40

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of setting aside Exts.P6 and P13 and directing the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P8 application and also to process the application for Building Permit submitted by the petitioner acknowledged by Ext.P5 and to take appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law, within a period of one month.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

spk

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶46

¶47

¶48

PETITION	ER EXHI	BITS
Exhibit	P1	A TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED AS 7 MUNDUR.	THE TITLE DEED 51/1/2022 BEFORE SRO
Exhibit	P2	A TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISS YEAR 1993 TO 20	THE ENCUMBRANCE UED BY SRO MUNDUR FROM 22 OF EXT P1 PROPERTY.
Exhibit	P3	A TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISS PERAMANGALAM OV DATED 18.04.202	THE POSSESSION UED BY VILLAGE OFFICE ER EXT.P1 PROPERTY 2.
Exhibit	P4	A TRUE COPY OF BY PERAMANGALAM EXT P1 PROPERTY	THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED VILLAGE OFFICER OVER DATED 02.04.2022.
Exhibit	P5	A TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT OF PERM 26.04.2022.	THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF IT APPLICATION DATED
Exhibit	P6	A TRUE COPY OF ISSUED BY 2ND R DATED 04.06.202	THE REFUSAL LETTER ESPONDENT TO PETITIONER 2.
Exhibit	P7	A TRUE COPY OF NO.827 OF 2021 21-06-2022.	STATUS SHEET OF R.S.A. AND 832 OF 2021 DATED
Exhibit	P8	A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION UND KERALA PANCHAYA ACKNOWLEDGMENT.	PETITIONER'S 20-06-2022 ER SECTION 235K(2) OF TH RAJ ACT AND
Exhibit	P9	A TRUE COPY OF 201/2022 BEFORE THRISSUR DATED	THE CAVEAT O.P. HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT 20-06-2022.
Exhibit	P10	A TRUE COPY OF O.S.NO.1338 OF	THE PLAINT IN 2022 DATED 25-06-2022.
Exhibit	P11	A TRUE COPY OF IN O.S.NO.1338 2022.	THE I.A.NO.04 OF 2022 OF 2022 IS DATED 25-06-
Exhibit	P12	A TRUE COPY OF 2022 IN O.S.NO.	ORDER IN I.A.NO.04 OF 1338 OF 2022.

¶49

WP(C) NO. 19638 OF 2022

¶50

¶51

Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FOR SECTION 235K(2) APPLICATION OF PETITIONER DATED 03-07-2022. Exhibit P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS. NO.1365/2007 AND OS. NO.3257/2006 Exhibit P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN AS.NO.267/2014 AND 298/2014

¶52

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL

Ramachandran A.K v. Kaiparambu Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandran A.K v. Kaiparambu 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

Sherly Mathew Vs Kerala State Election Commission

Shamsudheen, Vs Ittiva Grama Panchayat

Sumathy Vs State of Kerala

Mayakkara Seithalavi Vs Cherukavu Grama Panchayath

Khalid Vs State of Kerala

Ratheesh P.S, Vs the Director of Mining and Geology