IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 28864 of 2009(C) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- UMMER BAVA, S/O.ALIKUTTY HAJI, AGED 63 YEARS, ISAKANAKATH HOUSE, PANAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE MANJERI MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. *ADDL. R2. IMPLEADED: 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, TRIVANDRUM. *ADDL. R.2. IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DT. 15/09/10 IN I.A. NO.12701/10. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR, ADDL.R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.28864/2009-C: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER REFUSING TO GRANT BUILDING PERMIT TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 10/03/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.81/08-09. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.D.O., PERINTHALMANNA AS NO.K. DIS. 3714/2003/M DT. 10/06/2003. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.28864 of 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated 16th June, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner who is the owner in possession of 56.50 cents of property comprised in Re.Sy.No.11/6 of Manjeri Village filed this writ petition mainly challenging Ext.P1 and seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the first respondent to issue building permit on the basis of the sketch and plan submitted by the petitioner. As per Ext.P1, the reason for rejection of the application of the petitioner for building permit is the description of the property in question as paddy field in the relevant records. Ext.P2 would show that the properties of the petitioner were exempted from the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilization Order and he was permitted to convert the land by the R.D.O. A Division Bench of this Court in the decision in Praveen K. v. Land Revenue Commissioner (2010 (2) KLT 617), held that a mere description of the property in the revenue records is not the relevant factor for consideration of an application for building permit and what matters is the actual lie and nature of the property. In view of the said decision, I am of the view that Ext.P1 cannot be sustained and the action on the part of the respondents in rejecting the WP(C).No.28864/2009 2 application for building permit submitted by the petitioner as per Ext.P1 requires reconsideration. To enable such a reconsideration, Ext.P1 is set aside. Consequently, there will be a direction to the respondents to consider the application submitted by the petitioner on 24.12.2008 referred to in Ext.P1 afresh, in the light of the judgment in Praveen's case (supra) and also taking into account the actual nature of the property in question. This shall be done expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS