IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5747 of 2011(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- P.C.ALI, S/O. MUHAMMED, AGED 37 YEARS, POTTANAMCHALI HOUSE, ELAYOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 505. 2. THE PULPATTA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PULPATTA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 126. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PULPATTA VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 126. R1 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.5747 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner who is the Secretary of Nooral Hidaya Mosque at Pallaraparambu within the jursidiction of the Pulpatta Grama Panchayath filed an application before the second respondent for getting permission to open a burial ground. The second respondent as per Ext.P1 resolution dated 11.3.2008 forwarded the same to the competent authority viz., the first respondent. The said application was submitted under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayath Raj (Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1998 (for short 'the Rules'). Ext.P3 is the 'No Objection Certificate' issued by the District Medical Officer, Manjeri. The third respondent, as per report dated 20.12.2010, intimated the District Collector regarding the existence of a well within a distance of 48 metres of the proposed burial ground. Taking into account the said aspect, the first respondent decided to defer a decision on the said application. It is submitted that subsequently, the petitioner has re-constructed the compound wall in such a manner to make a distance between the compound wall and the well in question beyond 50 W.P.(C) NO.5747/2011 2 metres. Yet another impediment in the grant of permission for burial ground was non-availability of road access. On 14.9.2010, the petitioner has produced a consent letter from a property owner who expressed his willingness to provide access to the said burial ground. In short, the contention of the petitioner is that as on today, there is no impediment at all for considering the application submitted by him. It is still pending. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that though the petitioner was required to produce a revised plan of the burial ground, it was not produced by the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in fact, it was produced before the authorities. It is made clear that in case such a revised plan as requested was not furnished, it will be open to the petitioner to produce the same along with the copy of this judgment. In case of production of such a revised plan, the application referred above shall be considered by the first respondent and orders shall be passed thereon, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.5747/2011 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C) NO.5747/2011 4 JUDGMENT September, 2010