IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 12876 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.T.MANSOOR, S/O. MUHAMMED BASHEER HAJI, AGED 29 YEARS, THEKKARATHODIKA HOUSE, EDAKKARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE EDAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, EDAKKARA.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN FOR R1 BY ADV. SMT.K.S.SABITHA FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) No.12876 of 2010 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED EXECUTED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.2.2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 12876 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of a parcel of land, 5.50 cents in extent, situated in Survey No.1070/1 of Edakkara Village in Nilambur Taluk in Malappuram District. It is stated that the said parcel of land lies on the side of the Nilambur-Ooty State Highway. With a view to put up a commercial building in the said parcel of land, the petitioner submitted an application under the provisions of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999. By Ext.P7 order passed on 16.2.2010, the Secretary of Edakkara Grama Panchayat informed the petitioner that his application has been rejected for the reason that in the document of title, the property is described as 'Nilam'. Ext.P7 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The petitioner contends that on one side of his land lies the Nilambur-Ooty State Highway and on three other sides, there are commercial and residential buildings. He submits that though in the document of title, the property is described as 'Nilam' which was made following the entry in the revenue records, the ground reality is that the land belonging to him is not a 'Nilam' or 'Paddy field'. He contends that in such circumstances, the rejection of the application W.P.(C) No.12876/2010 2 for building permit cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. 3. The respondent Panchayat has filed a counter affidavit justifying the action taken by them. It is contended that the petitioner's application for building permit was rejected on the ground that in the document of title, the land is described as 'Nilam'. 4. It is evident from Ext.P6 photographs that the land belonging to the petitioner is not a paddy field as of now. The document of title shows that on the east of the petitioner's land lies a pathway having a width of 8 feet, on the south there is a public road and there are buildings on the northern and western sides. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the stand taken by the respondent grama panchayat cannot be sustained. Further, a learned single Judge of this Court has in Shahanaz Shukkoor v. Chelannur Grama Panchayat (2009 (3) KLT 899) has held that the mere description of an item of property as 'Nilam' in the revenue records or in the document of title cannot be a reason to deny a building permit. It was held that the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 will operate on the basis of the facts as they exist on ground and not on any quality or type of land, on its description in the document of title. In the light of the decision of W.P.(C) No.12876/2010 3 this Court in Shahanaz Shukkoor v. Chelannur Grama Panchayat (supra) and having regard to the fact that the land where the petitioner proposes to put up the building is not a paddy field, but land surrounded by buildings and abutting a public road, I am of the opinion that the stand taken by the respondent in Ext.P7 cannot be sustained. In the result, I allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P7 and direct the Secretary, Edakkara Grama Panchayat, to re-consider the petitioner's application for building permit and take an appropriate decision thereon, expeditiously and in any event, within one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment, before him. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. nj.