IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2010 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 36625 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAJAGOPAL S/O. RAGHAVA MENON, AGED 55, THARAMEL HOUSE, ASOKAPURAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST. REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY SRI. BALAKRISHNA PANICKER, S/O. U.B.PANICKER, THARAMEL HOUSE, ASOKAPURAM, ERUMATHALA, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, CHENGAMANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHENGAMANAD POST. 3. THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, CHENGAMANAD.PO CHENGAMANAD. 4. THE CHENGAMANAD VILLAGE OFFICER, CHENGAMANAD P.O., CHENGAMANAD. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.C.M.SURESH BABU FOR R2 MR.V.MANU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.36625/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF POWER OF ATTORNEY. P2 : COPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE. P3 : COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS EVIDENCING THE LIE OF THE PROPERTY. P3(a) : COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH EVIDENCING THE LIE OF THE ROAD ABUTTING THE LAND. P3(b) : COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTIES SURROUNDING THE PETITIONER'S LAND. P4 : COPY OF CERTIFICATE GRANTING PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT COMPOUND WALL. P5 : COPY OF ORDER OF R2 REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.36625 of 2009 (W) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 4th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner purchased a plot of land having an extent of about 60 cents, in survey Nos.277/12-2, 277/13 & 277/13-2 of Chengamanad Village. Ext.P2 is the possession certificate in respect of the land. It is stated that on the strength of Ext.P4 permit, a compound wall was constructed enclosing the property. Thereafter the petitioner submitted an application dated 20/04/2009 requesting the Panchayat to issue a building permit, in order to construct a residential house. According to the petitioner, the Committee constituted under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008, inspected the land and found the land seem to be reclaimed garden land. The petitioner has also produced Ext.P3, photographs of the plot, which also supports the contention raised. Thereafter the Panchayat issued Ext.P5 rejecting the application on the ground that the land is a reclaimed land. It is challenging Ext.P5, the writ petition is filed. WP(C) No.36625/2009 -2- 2. According to the petitioner, even at the time when he purchased the property, this land was a fully reclaimed garden land. The petitioner also submits that the properties in the neighbourhood also have been reclaimed and are all garden land. There is no paddy field anywhere in the nearby area. It is therefore contended that the reason stated in Ext.P5 for rejecting the building permit is illegal. 3. A reading of Ext.P5 shows that even according to the Secretary, the land in question is a garden land for several years. But however, what is stated is that as per the entry in the revenue records that the land was a paddy filed, and that the land is a reclaimed garden land. Therefore, if the land is garden land as shown in Ext.P5, there is no reason why the application submitted by the petitioner for building permit should not have been entertained. 4. Be that as it may, in order to ensure that the land is a fully developed garden land, it is only appropriate that the land is inspected by the 4th respondent, and if he is satisfied that the land is a garden land as asserted by the petitioner, he shall issue a WP(C) No.36625/2009 -3- certificate to the petitioner to that effect. The petitioner shall produce the same before the 2nd respondent, and that the 2nd respondent shall reconsider the application made by him. 5. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (1) The 4th respondent shall inspect the land of the petitioner in relation to which the building permit was applied for. On such inspection, if the land is found to be a garden land, a certificate to that effect shall be issued to the petitioner. (2) Once a certificate is so obtained, it will be open to the petitioner to produce the same before the 2nd respondent, who shall pass fresh orders on the application dated 20/04/2009 made by the petitioner for building permit. The inspection as above shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within ten days of production of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg