IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2009 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1 of 2009(S) ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.7904/2006 Dated 15/01/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- JOSE.M.J, S/O. JOHN, AGED 62, MEKUNNEL HOUSE, PARAPUZHA.P.O, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.P.PRIJITH SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): IST RESPONDENT ----------------------------- P.A. SALIM, THE SECRETARY, KODIKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KODIKULAM.P.O. ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI SRI.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE J. ------------------------ C.O.C.No.1 OF 2009 in WP(C)NO7904/2006 ------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard both sides. 2. My attention was drawn by Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, to Annexures A1 to A4, A6 and A7. Sri.K.K.Chandran Pillai, learned standing counsel for the Panchayat submitted that there is no violation of this court's direction in Annexure-A5. This court's direction was only that the Panchayat shall pass early orders on the building permit application submitted by the petitioner. As matter of fact, in this case no application for issuance of a building permit had been submitted by the petitioner. What the petitioner had submitted was only a petition for permission to continue with the construction. 2. The crux question, which falls for determination, is whether the petitioner is liable to comply with the building Rules. It is clear from Annexures A1 to A4 that the petitioner's construction had proceeded beyond the ground level when the C.O.C..No.1/2009 2 Government issued Circular No.24136/RA/1/07 LSGD dated 20/6/2007. Part 1 of clause 5(1)(d) of the above Circular provides that when the construction has proceeded beyond the ground level as on the date of promulgation of the Circular, building Rules will not apply. It is, therefore, declared that the building Rules will not apply to the construction which is being put up by the petitioner. 3. As already indicated, I do not think that any case is made out by the petitioner for initiation of action for contempt against the respondent. I close this Contempt of Court Case. However, in view of my findings regarding the legality of the construction being undertaken by the petitioner, there will be a direction to the respondent not to place any hindrance in the matter of the petitioner continuing with the construction. But, it is clarified that the petitioner will be liable to comply with Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE dpk