Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Rafeeque K. P vs Mananthavady Grama Panchayath on 4 February, 2019

Author: Shaji P.Chaly

Bench: Shaji P.Chaly

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

     MONDAY ,THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 15TH MAGHA, 1940

                         WP(C).No. 6255 of 2014



PETITIONER/S:


                RAFEEQUE K. P
                AGED 52 YEARS
                S/O LATE ABDUL KADER HAJE, KEYTEE SONS, MANANTHAVADY,
                WAYANAD-670 645.

                BY ADVS.
                M/S. P.B.KRISHNAN
                SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
                SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
                SRI.SABU GEORGE



RESPONDENT/S:
       1      MANANTHAVADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD-
              670 645.

      2         P.S.MURUKESAN, AGED 38 YEARS,
                S/O DHANASINGH, MANIVILAS, THALAPPUZHA P.O.,
                THAVINJAL AMSOM, THINDUMMAL DESOM, MANANTHAVADY
                TALUK, WAYANAD, PIN:670 644.

                BY ADVS.
                R1, SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY
                R2, SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No. 6255 of 2014

                                    2

                             JUDGMENT

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

(i)issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof calling for the records relating to Ext. P7 and quash the same;
(ii)grant the Petitioner such other appropriate reliefs that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant on the facts and in the circumstances of the case;
(iii)award the petitioner the costs of this Writ Petition.

2. Brief facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

3. Petitioner completed the construction of four storied building in 17 cents of property by securing a permit, issued by the 1st respondent Grama Panchayath, and only finishing works such as internal plastering, and fixation of electrical and sanitary fixtures fittings were pending. There upon, 1st respondent issued Ext.P2 show cause notice, on the ground that necessary parking space is not provided. Petitioner WP(C).No. 6255 of 2014 3 submitted Ext.P3 reply stating that parking space as per the approved plan is provided. Meanwhile, Ext.P4 suit was filed by 2nd respondent, a total stranger, on the allegation that the building is constructed in violation of the Building Rules and the conditions in the permit. The Munsiff's Court did not grant any injunction against the construction of the building. It is the case of the petitioner that the commission report discloses the stage of the construction.

4. The Panchayath is also a party to the suit. However, 1st respondent issued Ext.P7, stating that, since O.S.No. 17/2014 is pending before the Munsiff's Court, Manathavadi, in respect of the construction of the building, the construction shall be continued only after the decision in the suit. It is thus challenging Ext.P7 notice, this writ petition is filed by the petitioner.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and perused the pleadings and documents on record. WP(C).No. 6255 of 2014 4 This writ petition is pending before this court for the past 4 years, without securing any interim orders. It is clear from Ext.P7 that, building permit was granted by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath. However, consequent to filing of a suit by the 2nd respondent, stop memo was issued.

6. According to the petitioner, Ext.P7 order is bad, since there was no injunction granted by the Munsiff's Court, Manathavaadi against the construction carried out by the petitioner. Fact remains, the subject matter is before this court without any interim orders and the circumstances leading to issuance of Ext.P7 might have changed, for various reasons.

7. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath to take into account if anything survives to be considered, on account of the pendency of this writ petition, and the suit specified above, issue notice to the respective parties, if required, and finalise the proceedings, as early as possible, and at any rate, WP(C).No. 6255 of 2014 5 within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-


                                     SHAJI P.CHALY

SPR                                      JUDGE
 WP(C).No. 6255 of 2014

                                  6




                           APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1           A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED

18.4.2011 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.A4-2558/14 DATED 31.1.2014 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 18.2.2014. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ALONG WITH THE PLAINT AND I.A.NO.85 OF 2014 IN O.S.NO.17 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF THE MANANTHAVADY MUNSIFF'S COURT.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT IN I.A.NO.85 OF 2014 IN O.S.NO.17 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF THE MANANTHAVADY MUNSIFF'S COURT.

EXHIBIT P6 A TURE COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN I.A.NO.86 OF 2014 IN O.S.NO.17 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF THE MANANTHAVADY MUNSIFF'S COURT.

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.02.2014 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 28.02.2014. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL.