IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/2ND POUSHA 1933 WPC.No. 31003 of 2011 (A) PETITIONER: SUTHAN.K., S/O. KUNJUKUNJU, MELTHARAYIL HOUSE KUTTANPERUR MANNAR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV.MR.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2 THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE ALAPPUZHA. 4 THE PANDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PANDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE PANDANAD ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.V.K.RAFEEK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-12-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.No. 31003 of 2011 (A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: SALE DEED NO.1071/2009 OF CHENGANNOOR SRO. EXT.P2: POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE PANDANAD VILLAGE OFFICER. EXT.P3: CERTIFICATE DTD. 30.3.2010 ISSUED TO THE EPTITIONER BY THE KALAMASSERY TRAINING CENTRE. EXT.P4: LETTER ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MANNAR BRANCH. EXT.P5: RECEIPT NO.2533 DTD. 18.1.2010 ISSUED BY THE PANDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE PANDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH RELATING TO THE LICENCE. EXT.P7: ONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY THE NEIGHBOURING OWNERS. EXT.P8: LETTER DTD. 20.4.2010 ISSUED BY THE PANDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH REJECTING THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION. EXT.P9: LETTER DTD. 3.9.2011 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P10: CERTIFICATE DTD. 14.11.2011 ISSUED TO THE EPTITIONER BY THE PANDANAD VILLAGE OFFICER. EXT.P11: RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE PANDANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH IN ITS MEETING DTD. 18.1.2011. EXT.P12: MAHASSAR PREPARED BY THE PANDANAD VILLAGE OFFICER ON 1.7.2010. EXT.P13: REPRESENTATION DTD. 3.5.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR REVENUE. EXT.P14: REPORT OF THE SUB COLLECTOR. EXT.P15: CASTE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE TAHSILDAR, CHENGANNOOR. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.31003 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2011. J U D G M E N T Writ petition is filed seeking to quash Exts.P8 & P9 and for a direction commanding the 4th respondent to issue permit to the petitioner for the construction of the shed and licence for starting the Wire Cut Brick Unit. 2. The petitioner applied for building permit seeking permission to put up a shed and for licence to start a Wire Cut Brick Unit in his property covered by Ext.P1 sale deed. The application for permit and licence was rejected by the Panchayath stating that the property wherein the petitioner proposed to construct the shed and to start the brick unit is a paddy land as per the revenue records. 3. The petitioner submits that the property was reclaimed by the then owners of the land two decades before and the Village Officer issued certificate certifying that the property is not a paddy field, the property does not come within the ambit of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 and that the property is lying as a dry land. The petitioner further submits that by the refusal to grant permit and licence by the Panchayath the petitioner is put to severe hardship and his right to livelihood itself ::2:: W.P.(C).No.31003 Of 2011 is deprived. 4. Ext.P1 is the copy of the sale deed, P2 is the copy of the possession certificate and Ext.P10 is the copy of the certificate issued by the Village Officer. The petitioner, for the purpose of obtaining licence for starting the Wire Cut Brick Unit and permit for putting up a shed, has submitted applications to the Panchayath as early as in 18.1.2010. Along with the application the petitioner has also submitted consent letter from the neighbouring property owners. A copy of the consent letter is marked as Ext.P7. The Panchayath rejected the application for permit by Ext.P8 communication. The reason for rejection of the application is that the property is a paddy land as per the revenue records. Ext.P9 is the copy of the communication received from the office of the District Collector stating that the petitioner’s application cannot be considered in view of the provisions contained in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. Since the property is lying as a dry land for the past several years, in the light of the certificate issued by the Village Officer certifying that the property was reclaimed 20 years before and that the property is not included in the Data Bank prepared under the Kerela Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, the matter requires reconsideration. ::3:: W.P.(C).No.31003 Of 2011 5. 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). 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, Ext.P8 order and Ext.P9 are quashed. A direction is issued to the Secretary of the Panchayath to reconsider the applications for building permit and licence submitted by the petitioner 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, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 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. bkn/-