IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 11754 of 2005(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ CHANDRU, S/O. K.P. SAMY, MOOLAKADA, OLD MUNNAR, MUNNAR P.O., DIST. IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MUNNAR, DIST. IDUKKI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 11754/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.174 DATED 16.1.2004 OF S.R.O., DEVIKULAM. EXT.P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 27.5.03. EXT.P3 - A TRUE COPY OF BUILDING TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 2004-05. EXT.P4 - A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT DATED 23.8.04 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 - A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.11.2000 IN O.P.NO.551/95 AND THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.A.224/2001. EXT.P6 – A TRUE COPY OF THE RATIFICATION DEED DATED 28.11.1978. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 11754 OF 2005-Y ----------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The petitioner wanted to construct a building in the property owned by him. So, he submitted Ext.P4 application for permit before the 1st respondent Panchayat. Since no decision was taken by the Panchayat on his application, this Writ Petition was filed, seeking a direction to issue permit for the construction of the building, based on Ext.P4 application. During the pendency of the writ petition, this Court passed the following interim order: “Let the petitioner be permitted to construct on a purely temporary basis, subject to further orders of this Court, on his filing an undertaking before the first respondent to demolish the construction, if the writ petition is ultimately decided against him. It is clarified that this order will not result in equitable considerations in favour of the petitioner.” The petitioner submits, he has already constructed the building, as permitted by this Court. 2. No one appeared for the 1st respondent. It has not filed any counter affidavit also. Having regard to the facts of the case, the 1st respondent is directed to take a decision on Ext.P4 application in WPC 11754/2005 2 accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. If permit is granted and the construction made is found to be in conformity with that permit, the construction already made shall be treated as regular. If it is at variance with the permit granted, the petitioner has to modify the construction, so that it conforms to the permit granted or else it shall be demolished. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the Panchayat, he can work out his remedy before the Tribunal. If the petitioner produces a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent within one month from today, the construction made pursuant to the interim order of this Court will not be disturbed, pending decision by the Panchayat. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. 13th June, 2008. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. Nm/