IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2010 / 18TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 11387 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL NAZEER KUTTY,SON OF ABDULLA, SUHARA MANZIL,(BROTHERS VILLA) KALLELIBHAGOM, P.O KARUNAGAPPALLY,PIN-690 562. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH RESPONDENT: --------------- KARUNAGAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (SPECIAL GRADE), OFFICE OF THE KARUNAGAPPALL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOLLAM DISTRICT.PIN-690 518. ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 WP(C).No. 11387 of 2010 EXHIBITS ------------ PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------ P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT, DT.20.08.2009. P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.K6.235/09-10, DT. 5TH OCTOBER, 2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. K6.235/09-10, DT. 2ND JANUARY, 2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. K6.235/09-10, DT. 20TH MARCH, 2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDNENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------- WP (C) Nos. 11387 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by Exhibits P2, P3 and P4 notices issued by the Panchayth, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. The petitioner is a joint owner of the property in Sy. Nos. 718/-2, 718/5-2, 718/5-5 of Karunagappally Grama Panchayath. For constructing a commercial-cum- residential complex he approached the respondent for a building permit. As the land falls beyond 100 metres from the high tide line, and after getting status report from the Centre for Earth Science Studies building permit was issued as per Exhibit P1 by the Panchayath. 2. Later the petitioner was served Exhibit P2 to P4 notices informing that he should obtain permission from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. It is further informed that unless he gets the sanction, the permit will be cancelled. 3. It is contended by the petitioner that provision of any of the relevant enactments requires the permission 2 WP (C) Nos. 11387 of 2010 from the Ministry of Environment and Forests for a construction like this. It is submitted that the property is not situated in the Sea Coast and it is not within the CRZ area also. 4. The respondent has filed a counter affidavit admitting that the petitioner has produced a status report of the Centre for Earth Science Studies. The justification for issuing Exhibits P2 to P4 notices has not been elaborated in the counter affidavit. No particular provision, requiring any sanction from the Central Ministry has been pointed out Therefore, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, no permission is required from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, for making the construction. In that view of the matter, Exhibit P2 to P4 notices cannot be sustained and they are accordingly quashed. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. No costs T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. rkc