Kerala High Court
Aboobacker vs The Manjeri Municipality on 8 March, 2012
Author: C.K. Abdul Rehim
Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
&
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/22ND JYAISHTA 1934
WP(C).No. 9033 of 2012 (D)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
---------------------
1. ABOOBACKER, AGED 52 YEARS,
S/O.KUNJALANKUTTY HAJI.
2. ABDUL MAJEED,
S/O.ABOOBACKER.
3. MANSOOR,
S/O.ABOOBACKER.
4. ABDUL SALAM
S/O.KUNJALANKUTTY HAJI.
5. NABEESA
D/O.MAMMADAJI.
6. FATHIMA SUHARA,
D/O.KUNJUTTY HAJI.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT KARALIKADU HOUSE,
THRIPPANACHI, PULPATTA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
SRI.P.S.APPU
SRI.A.R.NIMOD
SRI.K.A.ANAS
RESPONDENT(S) :
------------------------
THE MANJERI MUNICIPALITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANJERI P.O.,
MALAPPURAM - 676 121.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
12-04-2012, THE COURT ON 12-06-2012 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
AMV
WP(C).No. 9033 of 2012 (D)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST
PETITIONER DATED 8-3-2012.
EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND
PETITIONER DATED 8-3-2012.
EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE
3RD PETITIONER DATED 8-3-2012.
EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE 4TH
PETITIONER DATED 8-3-2012.
EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONERS 5 & 6 DATED 8-3-2012.
EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER
DATED 13-2-2012.
EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICTING THE LIE OF THE
PROPERTY DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE ORDER OF REJECTION PASSED BY THE MANJERI
MUNICIPALITY DATED 19-3-2012.
EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 27145/2011 ON THE FILE OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 20-10-2011.
EXHIBIT P10: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 32651/2011 ON THE FILE OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 1-2-2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
AMV
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(c) No. 9033 OF 2012-D
-------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF JUNE, 2012
J U D G M E N T
Application submitted by the petitioners for building permits have been rejected by the respondent Municipality assigning the reason that the description of the property in the revenue records and title documents is as 'Nilam' (wet land), and hence construction cannot be permitted without obtaining permit from the Revenue Divisional Officer for conversion of the nature of the land. It is contended that the area in question is surrounded by a lot of commercial and residential buildings and the properties in question remain as pucca garden land (dry land). Various documents and photographs are produced inorder to substantiate the above contentions.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. K. Shibili Naha, standing counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality.
W.P.(c) No.9033/2012 -2-
3. In view of the legal position remaining settled through various decisions of this court in Shahanaz Shukoor V. Chelannoor Grama Panchayat (2009 (3) KLT 899), Praveen V. Land Revenue Commissioner (2010 (2) KHC 499) and Jafarkhan V. K.A. Kochumakkar and others (2012 (1) KHC 523 (DB), it is evident that building permit cannot be rejected merely on the reason that the description of the property in the revenue records remains as 'wet land'. It is settled law that the authority concerned has to look into ground reality and to take decision regarding permission for construction on that basis after ascertaining as to any objectionable conversion occurred after enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. Therefore, I am of the view that the reason mentioned for rejection of the applications is unsustainable.
4. In the result writ petition is allowed. Exhibit P8 and similar other proceedings if any issued with respect to petitioners 2 to 6 are hereby quashed. The Secretary of the W.P.(c) No.9033/2012 -3- respondent Municipality is directed to consider the applications for building permits submitted by the petitioners and to dispose of the same afresh in view of the findings rendered herein above. A decision in this regard shall be taken, if necessary after conducting physical inspection and after affording reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners. Needless to say that the petitioners shall be granted building permits if they are otherwise eligible and if their applications are otherwise in order.
5. A decision in this regard shall be taken at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
AMG True copy P.A to Judge