IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 33386 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.V.THOMAS, TELAMANNIL, MUKOOR NEGDUMGADAPALLIL P.O., MALLAPALLIL, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KUNNAMTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. KUNNAMTHANAM P.O. PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. SECRETARY, KUNNAMTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNNAMTHANAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 33386/2008 ------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 PHOTOGRAPH OF BUILDING. EXT.P2 LETTER DT. 26-11-2005. EXT.P3 AGREEMENT DT. 10-4-2006. EXT.P4 LETTER DT. 27-3-2008. EXT.P5 NOTICE DT. 10-4-2008. EXT.P6 APPEAL SUBMITTED ON 15-4-2008. EXT.P7 JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO. 23482/2008. EXT.P8 LETTER DT. 16-7-2008. EXT.P9 REPLY DT. 29-8-2008. EXT.P10 LETTER DT. 13-10-2008. EXT.P11 LETTER DT. 4-10-2008 [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 33386 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 23rd January, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that the building constructed by the petitioner is not being numbered by the 1st respondent-Panchayat on the ground that the building has been constructed in violation of Section 220(b) of the Panchayat Raj Act. The contention of the Panchayat is that by Ext. P9 resolution, the Panchayat has decided that the roads mentioned therein includes the Mukoor-Vadavanapadi road, which is the road in question in this writ petition, as roads for the purpose of Section 220(b). The petitioner would contend that Ext. P9 resolution by itself would not constitute a notification as contemplated under Section 220(b) as decided by this Court in the decisions of Thomas Paul v. State of Kerala, 2007(1) KLT 267 and Soman Pillai G v. Mavelikkara-Thamarakulam Grama Panchayat and Others, 2008 (4) KHC 160, which decisions stipulate that for application of Section 220(b), there should be a notification by the Panchayat as contemplated in Section 220(b) read with the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Manner of Publication of Notification or Notice) Rules, 1996. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that a notification as contemplated under the said provision has not been issued so far. The contention is that therefore Section 220(b) does not apply to the building constructed by the petitioner and therefore the Panchayat is bound to number the building. 2. The standing counsel for the Panchayat would contend that as is clear from the decision in Thomas Paul's case (supra), a gazette notification is not always necessary for the purpose of Section 220(b) and other modes of notification as permitted by the Government would be sufficient. According to him, the Government has by circular No. 58577/cl/95/LSGD dated 6-1-1996 stipulated the manner of notification of roads under Section 220(b), which has been W.P.C. No. 33386/2008 -: 2 :- complied with in so far as Ext. P9 resolution has been exhibited on the notice boards of the Panchayat, Village Office, Agricultural Office, Village Extension Office and also by public announcement, which is sufficient for the purpose of Section 220(b) read with the above said circular. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. The provisions of that circular are available at page 678 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Rules complied and edited by Dominic Johnson, which reads thus: W.P.C. No. 33386/2008 -: 3 :- Rule 3 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Manner of Publication of notification or notice) Rules reads thus: “3. Publication of Notification:- Save as otherwise expressly provided in the Act or the rules made thereunder, every notification issued under the provisions of the Act shall be published in the Government Gazette: Provided that the Government shall have power to direct that any such notification shall, instead of being published in the Gazette, be published in any other manner specified by them.” 5. I am not at all satisfied that the above circular deals with other modes of publication as provided under the proviso to the said Rules. In fact, that circular does not deal with the question of mode of notification of a road under Section 220(b) read with Rule 3 of the above said Rules. That circular only deals with the necessity to strictly implement the provisions in Section 220(b). 6. The result of the above discussion is that the petitioner has proved that there is no notification of this particular road as required W.P.C. No. 33386/2008 -: 4 :- under Section 229(b) read with Rule 3 of the Rules as held by this Court in the above said two decisions. That being so, the 1st respondent-Panchayat cannot now deny numbering of the petitioner's building on the ground that the construction violates Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to number the petitioner's building, if all other conditions are satisfied. The same shall be done within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/