IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2011 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 28025 of 2011(C) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------------- 1. DR.K.M.ABDUL JALEEL,S/O.MOHAMMED, ATHIRIPPILLIL,THRIKKALANGOTTU DESOM, ERNADU TALUK. 2. MRS.SAFALA JALEEL,W/O.K.M.ABDUL JALEEL, ATHRIPPILLIL,THRIKKALNGOTTU DESOM, ERNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. MANJERI MUNICIPALITY,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY,MUNICIPAL OFFICE,MANJERI-676 121. 2. THE SECRETARY,MANJERI MUNICIPALITY, MANJERI-676 121. ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).NO.28025/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2508/86 OF MA JERI SUB REGISTRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 1/20/2011 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. Kcv. HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 28025 OF 2011 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT Writ Petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P4 order and for a direction commanding the respondents to grant building permit untrammelled by the observation that the said permission sought for is for a construction of the building in the ''Nilam 'property and for other incidental reliefs. 2. The petitioners submit that they own and possess 13 ½ cents of land comprised in Sy.No.107/2 of Manjeri Village as per the sale deed No.2508/86. Copy of the sale deed is marked as Ext.P1. The property is described as “barren land” in Ext.P1 sale deed. Ext.P2 is the copy of the possession certificate issued by the Village Officer in favour of the petitioners, wherein the nature of land is described as 'Nilam'. The property is situated on the side of the two major roads and also in a commercial area. However, the property is shown as “Nilam” in the revenue records. It is pointed out by the petitioners that -2- W.P.(C).No.28025/2011 the property is lying in a pucca commercial area and large number of buildings are constructed on the side of the petitioners' property on the strength of the permits issued by the respondents. 3. For the purpose of constructing a commercial building the petitioners applied for building permit before the Municipality. By Ext.P4 order the Municipality rejected the application for building permit stating that the land is described as “Nilam” in the revenue records and hence the building permit cannot be granted. 4. A Division Bench of this Court in Praveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner (2010 (2) KLT 617) held that the nature of the property recorded in the village office as paddy land is not a reason for rejecting the application for permit and that the ground reality has to be considered before passing an order on the application for building permit. Similar view was taken by this Court in the decision reported in Shahanaz Shukkoor v. Chelannur Grama Panchayath (2009 (3) KLT 899). Therefore. I -3- W.P.(C).No.28025/2011 am constrained to hold that Ext.P4 order rejecting the application cannot be sustained. 5. In the result. Ext.P4 order is quashed. The Secretary of the Municipality is directed to re-consider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for further action. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. kcv.