Dismissed

Augusty v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Jul 2022WP(C)/4/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-numbering of his building and sought quashing of a communication regarding Section 220(b) violation. Court rejected relief noting petitioner failed to submit a completion certificate. Liberty granted to file application for occupancy certificate within one month.

What did the court decide?

Reliefs sought, i.e., quashing of Ext.P7 and direction to number the building, are declined. Petitioner granted liberty to approach the Secretary for an occupancy certificate within one month.

Augusty Vs the State of Kerala — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 4 OF 2016

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

AUGUSTY
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. MANIVELIL JOSEPH,
EDAMARUKU KARA,
UDUMPANNUR VILLAGE,
CHEENIKUZHI P.O.,
THODUPUZHA TALUK - 685 595.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1THE STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶10

2THE KARIMANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
P.O.KARIMANNOOR,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 581.

¶11

R1 BY SRI. K.P. HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R2 BY ADVS.SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY

¶12

 SRI.MATHEW JOHN K

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

¶18

“i). call for the records leading to Ext.P7 and may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the same.

¶19

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the second respondent to immediately number the building of the petitioner constructed in terms of Ext.P1, in the interest of justice.”

¶20

The case of the petitioner is that petitioner has carried out construction of a building after securing Ext.P1 permit from the Secretary of the Karimannoor Grama Panchayat – the second respondent herein. It is the further case of the petitioner that the construction was carried out in accordance with the permit and plan approved by the Secretary. However, building is not assigned with a number. But at the same time, the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat has issued various communications to the petitioner stating that the

¶21

W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016

¶22

¶23

construction carried out by the petitioner is violative of Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.

¶24

From the perusal of the documents produced by the petitioner, it is quite clear and evident that the petitioner has not submitted any reply to the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat in spite of the Secretary issuing a notice and pointing out that the construction is violative of Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Whatever that be, when a building construction is completed after securing a building permit, the building owner has to necessarily submit a completion certificate as prescribed under the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 and seek occupancy. At that point of time, the Secretary has to necessarily conduct due inspection and find out as to whether the building is constructed in

¶25

W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016

¶26

¶27

accordance with the building permit and as per the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. The petitioner has no case in this writ petition that after the construction of the building, the petitioner has approached the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat with a completion certificate in order to secure occupancy certificate and building number. Even though petitioner has produced Ext.P2 demand raised, as if to appear that the Panchayat has raised the demand, in fact Ext.P2 is a demand notice raised by the Thahsildar as per Section 3 of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, which has nothing to do with the illegality in construction.

¶28

In that view of the matter, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get any relief as sought for by the petitioner. Therefore, the reliefs sought for in the writ petition are declined.

¶29

W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016

¶30

¶31

However, petitioner is granted with a liberty to approach the Secretary with an application for issuing occupancy certificate along with all the other attendant documents. If any such application is submitted within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the said application shall be finalised by the Secretary, in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of participation to the petitioner herein within two months thereafter.

¶32

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

DCS/01.07.2022

W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016

APPENDIX

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶40

Exhibit P1A TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT GRANTED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 30.5.2012.

¶41

Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED
BY THE TALUK OFFICE THODUPPZHA DT.
26.2.2014.

¶42

Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT IN THE
NAME OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE
KARIMANNOOR VILLAGE OFFICE DT.
18.3.2014.

¶43

Exhibit P4A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY
THE LAND SURVEYOR DT. 07.4.2014.

¶44

Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO.
1676/2014 DT. 27.5.2014 OF THE KARIKODE
S.R.O.

¶45

Exhibit P6A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE
2ND RESPONDENT DT. 04.3.2014.
Exhibit P7A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED NIL

Augusty v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Augusty v. the State of Kerala

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

Zavier Vs the State of Kerala

Kunnampalli Unnikrishnan Vs the State of Kerala

Elsy Joseph Vs Laiju

Laina Shiju Vs Elamkunnapuzha Grama Panchayath

Abdul Rahim Vs Kozhikode Muinicipal Corporation

Rajendra Prasad Vs Kulasekharapuram Grama Panchayat