IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 35096 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SILVANA CORBANI, MANAGING DIRECTOR, SUKRITI RESORTS PVT LTD., 224, NARIMAN APARTMENTS, MYUR VIHAR, PHASE I, NEW DELHI-110 091. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. EDAVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EDAVA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 311, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, EDAVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EDAVA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 311. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.35096 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 JUDGMENT The second respondent is the Secretary of the first respondent Grama Panchayat. Notice to respondents dispensed with preserving their right to move for rehearing of this writ petition, if aggrieved. 2. On the strength of an assignment in its favour, the petitioner applied for change of the name of the owner of the building in question, in the assessment register of the Grama Panchayat. Going by the impugned Ext.P3, the Secretary of Grama panchayat records that the rights of the erstwhile owner has been transferred to the petitioner. But, the change of the entries in the assessment register regarding the name of the owner is refused on the ground that the petitioner is likely to put Wpc 35096/09 2 up a resort and on local inspection it has come out that the petitioner's intention is to put up a resort. That is not a ground to refuse to make entry regarding change of ownership. Putting up a resort or putting the land to any other use by making constructions would be a matter that would arise for decision only when request for permission in that regard comes up for consideration. The impugned order and the reasons stated therein, essentially affects the rights of the petitioner under the Panchayat Raj Act and also fundamental rights referable to Part III of the Constitution. There is no prohibition either in Panchayat Raj Act or in Transfer of Property Act pointed out by the Secretary, in terms of which transfer in favour of the petitioner is void. 3. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is allowed quashing Ext.P5 directing Wpc 35096/09 3 the Grama Panchayat Secretary to take up the request of the petitioner for change of the name of the owner in the assessment register and issue decision on such request without reference to the reasons stated in Ext.P3. Let this be done within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/8/12