IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 23596 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SREEDHARAN PARATTU, S/O.VELU, PARATTU HOUSE, POOLAMANNA, PANDIKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE PANDIKKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANDIKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA. 3. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. MR.SAJU.S.A FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BIJU MEENATTOOR FOR R2 & 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23596 of 2010(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY R1 TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 30.7.2007. EXT.P2: APPEAL PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R3 DTD. 6.12.2007. EXT.P3: ORDER DTD. 31.12.2007 ISSUED BY R3 AS NO.L.R.(A)1-57436/07. EXT.P4: DOCUMENT NO.4564/2005 OF THE S.R.O., KARUVARAKUNDU. EXT.P5: DIFFERENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BUILDING OF THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ....... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.23596 Of 2010 ---------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed for a direction commanding the 1st respondent to assign building number to the building constructed by the petitioner in resurvey No.219/3 in Block No.145 and to declare that the property described as 'Palliyal' in the revenue records, is not the paddy field and does not require the exemption orders under the K.L.U order. 2. In the year 2007, the petitioner had constructed a commercial building in his property. It is pointed out that at the time when the construction was completed, the Building Rules were not applicable to the 1st respondent Panchayath. After the construction, the petitioner applied for assigning building number. The application was rejected by the Panchayath stating that the type of land in the document is shown as 'Palliyal'. The petitioner was directed to obtain order under K.L.U. Ext.P1 is the copy of the order. The petitioner submits that the land in question is not a paddy field or dry land and that the land cannot be utilized for ::2:: W.P.(C).No.23596 Of 2011 any type of cultivation. It is also pointed out that the adjoining land has been developed for the purpose of construction of a bus stand and for the construction of several commercial and industrial buildings. The petitioner approached the 3rd respondent in appeal and the 3rd respondent rejected the appeal stating that there was a direction by the Government not to permit any type of conversion of lands. The petitioner submits that since the property is not a paddy field and that the nature of the property is recorded as 'Palliyal' in the revenue records, no order of conversion or any order of exemption is required to be submitted to the respondent local authority. Ext.P5 is the photographs showing the lie and nature of the property. Ext.P5 photographs show that the property is lying as a dry land and that the building constructed in the said property remains to be unoccupied and unused for the simple reason that the 1st respondent Panchayath has not assign building number to the building. 3. 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 ::3:: W.P.(C).No.23596 Of 2011 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). 4. For the very same reasons namely, the nature of the property is shown as 'Palliyal' in the revenue records is not a reason for rejecting the application for assigning building number to the building already constructed in the property. In the above said facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent Panchayath to assign building number to the building constructed in resurvey No.219/3 in Block No.145 and pass appropriate orders, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-