IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2010 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1932 WA.No. 256 of 2010 ------ -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.11/2010 Dated 05/01/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WPC: ------------------------------------------------- ANILKUMAR, S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 43 YEARS, 39/1845 JYOTHY, PALARIVATTOM, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER R.RAVINDRAN PILLAI S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, AGED 67 YEARS, RESIDING AT 35/1849 JYOTHY, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-682025. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJENDRAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ SRI.SURAJ.S SRI.P.A.KUMARAN SMT.VINEETHA B. SRI.NIRMAL V NAIR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHERANALLOOR, SOUTH CHITTOR, KOCHI-682027. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KAKKANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD P.O. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN R2 TO R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.256 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. The appellant/petitioner constructed a building which according to him is not in violation of any Building Rules. However, the first respondent Panchayat without numbering the building ordered its demolition saying that it is constructed in violation of the Building Rules. 2. When the appellant challenged the same before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter to the Panchayat for fresh consideration. 3. The writ petition was filed for a direction to the Panchayat to number the building. The learned Single Judge held that since the matter stands remanded by the Tribunal to the Panchayat for considering whether the construction is in accordance with the Building Rules or not, there was no scope for this Court directing the Panchayat to number the building. 4. Sri.M.R.Rajendran Nasir, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the Panchayat is unduly delaying the W.A. No.256 of 2010 . - 2 - matter. We find force in this contention because this way or that way the Panchayat is bound to take a decision pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal. If there is any minor violation of the Building Rules it needs to be only rectified and the Panchayat should pass an order pointing out the same. If the building cannot be numbered for major violations if any, the Panchayat will state reasons and pass orders. On the other hand, if any rectification can be carried out, the appellant would be given an opportunity to rectify the construction. Writ appeal is disposed of directing the Panchayat to take a final decision after giving an opportunity to the appellant within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge vns