IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 19328 of 2005(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- ANNAKUTTY VARGHESE, PUTHIYEADATH HOUSE, MILLUMPADY JN., 200 ACRE, MANNAMKANDAM P.O., ADIMALI-685 561. BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT (SPECIAL GRADE), MUNNAR P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA R2 BY ADVS. SRI.JOICE GEORGE, SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF, SC, MUNNAR G.PANCHAYAT, SMT.MOLLY JACOB, SC, MUNNAR G.PANCHAYAT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.19328 of 2005 ---------------------------- Dated 16th March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner who is in possession of 13 cents of land comprised in Survey No.61/16 of Munnar Grama Panchayat submitted Ext.P5 application for building permit. The said application was rejected as per Ext.P7, holding that permission could not be granted for re- construction/renovation. It is challenging Ext.P7 order and also seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to proceed with the construction that this writ petition has been filed. Ext.P7 would reveal that the said order was passed taking note of the interim orders passed in an original petition which was then pending before this Court as O.P.No.551 of 1995 . In that original petition, the petitioners whose request for granting building permit was declined on the ground that the existing structures are within 50 yards of Munnar river. The said original petition was disposed of with a direction to demolish all such structures situated within 50 yards of Munnar river. However, a Division Bench of this Court modified the said direction and granted substantial reliefs to the affected persons. Later, the matter was taken up before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court stayed the judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.No.448 of WP(C).No.19328/2005 2 2001 and connected cases. I do not think that I should delve into the facts any further in view of the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.20963 of 2007 and connected cases filed against the orders rejecting building permits relying on the judgment of the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.551 of 1995 and also taking note of all the subsequent developments. In fact, in most of those cases constructions were completed much earlier. In the meanwhile, the Hon'ble Apex Court though initially stayed the judgment of the Division Bench, modified the said order and confined it as an order requiring maintenance of status quo. Taking note of the said subsequent development, W.P.(C)No.20963 of 2007 and connected cases were disposed of as hereunder:- “In view of the said position, the Panchayat/Government cannot take any further action against the petitioners. But, they cannot make any further construction also. Both sides should maintain status quo. In view of the above development, further coercive steps pursuant to the impugned orders cannot be taken either by the Panchayat or other authorities. They have to wait for the outcome of the decision of the Apex Court and the parties can work out their remedies based on the order of the Apex Court. Till such time both sides shall maintain status quo. In some writ petitions, other contentions in support of the claims of the petitioners have been raised. It is made clear that they are kept open.” WP(C).No.19328/2005 3 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein is similarly situated to that of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.20963 of 2007 and connected matters. The petitioner has already effected construction based on the interim order passed by this Court on 4.7.2005. In view of the fact that the Hon'ble Apex Court modified the interim order of stay and confined it to only an order requiring the parties to maintain status quo, I am of the view that the petitioner herein is also entitled to an order similar to the one granted to the petitioners in W.P.(C)No.20963 of 2007 and connected matters. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as hereunder:- In view of the fact that the Hon'ble Apex Court modified the interim stay of the operation and implementation of the judgment in W.A.No.448 of 2001 and connected cases and modified it as an order requiring maintenance of status quo, the Panchayat/Government cannot take any further action against the petitioner. However, it is made clear that, that would not enable the petitioner to effect any further construction thereon. In short, the parties in this writ petition shall have to maintain status quo. In view of the said development, no further coercive steps pursuant to the impugned orders shall be taken either by the Panchayat or other authorities. They have to wait for the outcome of WP(C).No.19328/2005 4 the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above referred matter and have to work out the remedies based on the outcome of the said matter which is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Till such time both sides shall maintain status quo. If the parties have any other contentions in support of their claim, it is made clear that such contentions are left open. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // true copy // P.S. to Judge