IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 4TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 13TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25131 of 2008(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ RAVI MOOS, S/O E.T.DIVAKARAN MOOS, THAIKKAT MANA, ANANDPURAM VILLAGE &DESOM MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE RDO THRISSUR, 3. MURIYAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MURIYAD POST, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER ANANDAPURAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ANANDAPURAM POST. BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNAPRASAD(BY ORDER) GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 25131 OF 2008 P = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of September 2008 J U D G M E N T The building permit applied for by the petitioner has been rejected by Ext. P6. The reason stated in Ext. P6 is that in the revenue records the land is shown as 'Nilam'. A reading of Ext. P5, the mahazar prepared by the Village Officer pursuant to the direction of the District Collector would indicate that the land is a fully developed garden land with yielding trees. Though the nomenclature used in the revenue records indicated the land as a paddy field, in reality it is otherwise. If that be so, I see no justification for the rejection of the application purely on account of the entries in the revenue records. 2. In view of this, I quash Ext. P6 and direct that the 3rd respondent shall inspect the land in relation to which application for building permit was made by the petitioner and if the land is found to be a fully developed garden land as reported by the Village W.P.(C) No. 25131 OF 2008 -2- Officer in Ext. P5, the application made by the petitioner for building permit shall be reconsidered. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 3. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-