IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2011 / 21ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 36809 of 2010(A) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O. BAPPU, VINOD BHAVAN, KUNNUMMEL, MANATHANA AMSOM, MURINGODI. BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.N.K.SHEEBA SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, 5TH FLOOR, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. PERAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY, PERAVOOR.P.O, KANNUR - 670 673. 3. SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY, PERAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PERAVOOR.P.O, KANNUR - 670 673. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER R2 & 3 BY ADVS. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 36809/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: THE TAX RECEIPT RECENTLY PAID DATED 16/07/2010. P2: THE REJECTED ORDER NO.7372/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12/10/2010. P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19/10/2010. P4: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22/10/2010. P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22/10/2010 IN WPC.NO.34619/09 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 36809 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of July 2011. JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P2 order passed by the Panchayat Secretary, Peravoor Grama Panchayat and for a direction commanding respondents to grant building permit to the petitioner to construct the residential building in the property owned by the petitioner vide document No. 2679/1967 SRO Peravoor. The petitioner applied for building permit. Ext.P2 is the order rejecting the application. 2. The application for building permit was rejected for the sole reason that the nature of the land stated in the tittle document is paddy field. Exts.P3 &P4 information conveyed to the petitioner by the W.P.(C) No. 36809 of 2010 2 revenue authorities would show that the land ceased to be 'Nilam' for several years back. As per Ext.P4 communication it would show that the land is cultivated with coconut trees and aracanut trees and the age of the improvements are around 20 to 50 years. 3. The Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in Praveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner (2010 (2) KLT 617) held that the nature of the property recorded in the village office as paddy field is not a reason for rejecting the application for permit and that the ground realty has to be considered before passing an order on the application for building permit. Similar view was taken by this Court in the decision reported in Sahahnaz Shukkoor v. Chelannur Grama Panchayat (2009 (3) KLT 899). W.P.(C) No. 36809 of 2010 3 4. In such circumstances, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Raju S.Jethmalani and others v. State of Maharashtra and others (2005 (11) SCC 222) and the decisions of this Court quoted above, the decision of the Peravoor Grama Panchayat rejecting the petitioner's application for building permit cannot be sustained. In the case referred above, the Apex Court held that though land belonging to private persons can be included in development plan, unless the land is promptly acquired by State Government or the Municipal Corporation to effectuate the said purpose, the land owner cannot be denied the right to use the property for any other purpose. I am therefore constrained to hold that Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. 5. In the result, Ext.P2 order passed by the Panchayat is quashed. The Secretary of the Panchayat shall consider the nature of the land irrespective of W.P.(C) No. 36809 of 2010 4 the description of the property in the title deed and is directed to consider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the building permit application and grant permit if the application is in order in other respects as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment to the Secretary of the Panchayat for further action. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE al