Kerala High Court
Kunnamkulam Rifle Club vs State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2016
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2016/20TH ASHADHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 5072 of 2016 (H)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
------------------------
KUNNAMKULAM RIFLE CLUB
REGISTERED OFFICE BUILDING NO XIX/5,OPP. TOWN HALL,
HERBERT ROAD, P O KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680503,
REP BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE, C S PRATHAPAN,
S/O. C K SREEDHRAN, R/A.CHANAYIL HOUSE, P O PORKULAM,
PAZHANJI VIA, THRISSUR 680542
BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.CHACKO
SMT.C.M.CHARISMA
SMT.MEGHA K.XAVIER
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2. PORKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REP BY SECRETARY, PORKKULAM P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680542
3. THE SECRETARY
PORKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PORKULAM P O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT 680542
4. SURESH BABU
S/O.BALAKRISHNA MENON, HOUSE NO XVII/386, PATTITHARA
GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PATTITHARA VILLAGE, OTTAPALAM TALUK
R3 BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT
R4 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.JOY
R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P M SANEER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
11-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 5072 of 2016 (H)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
P1:-TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF AFFILICATION
P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD 4/6/2012
P3:-TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DTD 7/11/2014
P4:-TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DTD 7/11/2014
P5:-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DTD 7/4/2015 OF 3RD RESPONDENT
P6:-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DTD 17/8/2015 OF 3RD RESPONDENT
P7:-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD 10/4/2013 IN WPC NO
20204/2012
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
-----------------------
TRUE COPY
P.A TO JUDGE
jma
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P(C) No. 5072 of 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 11th day of July, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a registered charitable trust. They purchased 17.62 Ares of property comprised in re-survey No.412/4 and 2.63 Ares of property comprised in resurvey No.412/7 of Akathiyoor village. They obtained the same vide:
sale deed No.2191/12 dated 04.06.2012 of SRO Akkikkavu as evidenced by Ext.P2. The issue raised is with respect to granting building permit for construction of a building; to the petitioner in the land so purchased which was comprised in one larger extent.
2. Admittedly the petitioners purchased the land from a third party, who had in his possession and ownership larger extent of land, which he divided into sub plots and sold WPC.No.5072/2016 : 2 : to different persons. On submission of application for building permit, the same was declined by the Panchayat, interalia for the reason that there is no development plan appended,since there is a sub division of plots from a larger extent. The communication at Ext.P5 was , obviously responded to by the petitioner upon which Ext.P6 was issued.
3. The petitioner challenges the said denial on the ground that it is evident from Exhibit P2 that the land is "paramba", i.e., "garden land" and in sub dividing the same into plots and selling it to different owners, there is no "development of land" as contemplated under Rule 2(ac) of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as "Building Rules"). It is also submitted that while the larger extent was sub divided into plots, the vendor had in fact provided roads for ingress and egress to various plots and WPC.No.5072/2016 : 3 : that is very evident, since otherwise the small holders would not have purchased the land nor applied for building construction.
4. The Panchayat contends that it is constantly faced with the problem of agricultural lands being converted into garden land by undertaking filling and then selling small sub-divided extents to individuals. The definition of "development of land" as per the Building Rules take in material change in the user of the land and when agricultural land is converted for residential purposes, necessarily there should be a development plan submitted before the local authority and sanction obtained prior to the development; to ensure that the conversion is in accordance with Rule 31 of the Building Rules as also payment of fee for such development to be made to the local authority.
WPC.No.5072/2016 : 4 :
5. Looking at the facts of the instant case, it cannot be said that the petitioners' lands were part of agricultural lands earlier to the purchase by the petitioners. The title deeds would indicate that they were garden land and were sub divided by the vendor into small plots for sale to different individuals. In fact even in the counter affidavit of the Panchayat, there is no averment that the land was an agricultural land as per the revenue records or that any filling was carried on in the said land for conversion of user. In such circumstance, relying on the judgment produced at Ext.P7, it is directed that the respondent-Panchayat shall consider the application submitted by the petitioner for building permit without insisting on any layout or development plan approval and issue the building permit, if the application is otherwise in order, in accordance with law within a period of one month WPC.No.5072/2016 : 5 : from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this Court has only looked into the requirement of a development plan and found the same to be not necessary and any other provision of the KPBR 2011 will have to be complied with.
The writ petition is allowed, with the above direction. No costs.
Sd/-
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)
jma //true copy//
P.A to Judge