Allowed

P. Mujeeb Rahman v. the Ramanattukara Municipality

Kerala HC25 Mar 2024WP(C)/7778/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the rejection of his building permit renewal application, arguing his Structural Stability Certificate was valid. The court quashed the impugned order and directed the Municipality to reconsider the application after a hearing.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 25.10.2023 (Ex.P10) is quashed. Respondents are directed to reconsider the petitioner's application and take a decision within six weeks.

P. Mujeeb Rahman Vs the Ramanattukara Municipality — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2024)

W.P(C) No.7778/24 1

W.P(C) No.7778/24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶7

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶8

WP(C) NO. 7778 OF 2024

¶9

PETITIONER/S:

¶10

P. MUJEEB RAHMAN

¶11

AGED 43 YEARS

¶12

S/O LATE AVARANKUTTY HAJI, ZAIBUNA MANZIL, RAMANATTUKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673633

¶13

BY ADV R.RAMADAS

¶14

RESPONDENT/S:

¶15

1THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT, PIN - 673633

¶16

2THE SECRETARY
RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT, PIN - 673633

¶17

BY ADV P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH, SC

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

W.P(C) No.7778/24

¶20

¶21

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J

¶22

............................................................

¶23

W.P(C) No.7778 of 2024

¶24

Dated this the 25^th day of March, 2024

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

The writ petitioner is stated to be the absolute owner of 1.82 Ares of land in R.S.No.298/2011 of Ramanattukara village, Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District. He had applied for a building permit, which was granted as per Ext.P1, on the strength of which he stated construction, but the same could not be completed. The petitioner applied for renewal of the permit, which stood rejected by Ext.P2, which led to the filing of W.P(C) No.34612/2022 by the petitioner and by judgment dated 12.01.2023, Ext.P3, the Municipality was directed to reconsider his application. Pursuant to the direction in Ext.P3 judgment, the application for renewal was considered and again rejected by Ext.P10 on the ground that the petitioner has not produced the Structural Stability Certificate. The petitioner points out that he has produced Ext.P6 Structural Stability Certificate issued by an Engineer who is a postgraduate with more than ten years’ experience.

¶27

A statement has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, wherein it is stated that there were two contrasting reports regarding the same building before the 2nd respondent and it was on account of the same, that the

¶28

W.P(C) No.7778/24

¶29

¶30

impugned order was passed. He has also produced a government order dated 09.02.2024, which states that a ‘structural engineer’ means a civil engineer with a postgraduate degree in structural engineering with a minimum of 5 years of experience in structural design and supervision. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit producing Ext.P11 which shows the Master’s Degree Certificate issued in 2014.

¶31

In the light of the above, the impugned order is quashed. There will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to reconsider the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of the building permit, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. A decision in this regard shall be taken within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It will be open to the petitioner to produce such documents to substantiate his contentions, which will be adverted to by the Secretary while considering his application as directed above.

¶32

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶33

SD/-

¶34

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE

okb/

W.P(C) No.7778/24

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7778/2024

¶39

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶40

`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `ISSUED BY THE 1S` `PETITIONER`	`BUILDING PERMIT DATED 27.03.2018` `T RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY TO THE`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT`	`ORDER DATED 20.08.2022 ISSUED BY`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `(C) NO.34612/2022`	`JUDGMENT DATED 12.01.2023 IN W.P.`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE O` `RESPONDENT`	`RDER DATED 02.08.2023 FROM THE 2ND`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `2ND RESPONDENT`	`NOTICE DATED 07.09.2023 FROM THE`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE COPY OF T` `13.09.2023 BEFORE`	`HE STABILITY CERTIFICATE DATED` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `THE 2ND RESPONDE` `ENGINEERING COLLEG`	`LETTER DATED 04.10.2023 ISSUED BY` `NT TO THE PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT` `E, WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE`
`Exhibit P8`	`TRUE COPY OF THE N` `THE PETITIONER FRO`	`OTICE DATED 05.10.2023 RECEIVED BY` `M THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `2ND RESPONDENT`	`NOTICE DATED 18.10.2023 FROM THE`
`Exhibit P10`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT`	`ORDER DATED 25.10.2023 ISSUED BY`
`Exhibit P11`	`True copy of the` `14.11.2014 issued`	`Masters Degree Certificate dated` `by the University of Manchester`
`RESPONDENT EXHI`	`BITS`
`Exhibit R1(A)`	`A true copy of` `20/2024/LSGD dated`	`the relevant pages of G.O. No.` `09.02.2024`

P. Mujeeb Rahman v. the Ramanattukara Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Mujeeb Rahman v. the Ramanattukara Municipality

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

Tintu Merin Abraham Vs Commissioner of Examinations

Dr.Binoo P Bonny Vs Kerala Agricultural University

Dr.Safiya N.E Vs Kerala Agricultural University

Jaco K. a Vs Kaiparambu Grama Panchayath

M/S Alliance Marine Products Vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Dr. Bhavyasree. P.G Vs Vellappally Natesan