Simon J vs Revenue Divisional Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 14775 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                         PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
 THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1943
                  WP(C) NO. 2858 OF 2013
PETITIONERS:

    1    SIMON J.,
         S/O. JOSEPH,
         RESIDING AT AKHIL BHAVAN,
         MALAYAM P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695571.
    2    ROY RAJ,
         AGED 45 YEARS,
         S/O. ALFRED, ABIN NIVAS, MALAYAM P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695571.
    3    T. LAWRENCE
         AGED 65 YEARS
         S/O. THOMAS,
         RESIDING AT L.S.NIVAS, MALAYAM P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695571.

         BY ADV SRI.RAJU SEBASTIAN VADAKKEKKARA
         SRI.S.KRISHNA KUMAR


RESPONDENTS:

    1    REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
         CIVIL STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
    2    THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
         VILAVOORKKAL VILLAGE, MALAYINKEEZH P.O.,
         TRIVANDRUM-695571.
    3    VILAVOORKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POTTAYIL,
         MALAYINKEEZH P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695571.
    4    S.A.JOHN,
         AGED 62 YEARS,
         S/O. APPALOSE, RESIDING AT A.T.HOUSE,
         MALAYAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695571.
 WP(C) No.2858/2013
                            :2 :


     5     ARUN A.JOHN,
           AGED 34 YEARS
           S/O. S.A.JOHN, RESIDING AT A.T.HOUSE,
           MALAYAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695571.

           BY ADVS.
           GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. G. RANJITA
           SRI.D.KISHORE
           SRI.K.MOHANAKUMAR POOJAPPURA
           SRI.K.G.RADHAKRISHNAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP     FOR
ADMISSION ON 15.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME     DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.2858/2013
                                 :3 :




                          JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 15th day of July, 2021

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking

to cancel the permit granted to the 5 th respondent for

construction of multi-storied building, in the light of Ext.P3

Stop Memo. Certain incidental reliefs are also sought for.

2. The petitioners state that they are residents of

Malayam area in Vilavoorkkal Grama Panchayat in

Thiruvananthapuram District. Respondents 4 and 5 own vast

areas of property near the properties of the petitioners. For

constructing a Private Medical Clinic, the 4 th respondent, who

is a Government Doctor, along with his son, is constructing a

big building in the property. The 4th respondent has filled up

paddy field for the construction. A Bund/Pathway which has

been used by the nearby inhabitants, has been demolished

illegally. The property comes within 100 metres of a Defence WP(C) No.2858/2013

Property, and the construction is being carried out without

obtaining permission from the Defence authorities. No

Development Permit has been obtained for developing the

land.

3. The petitioners filed Ext.P1 complaint to the

Revenue Divisional Officer. Thereupon, Ext.P3 Stop Memo

was issued by the Village Officer to the 4 th respondent. A

mass complaint, Ext.P4, was filed before the Secretary of the

Panchayat against obstruction caused to the pathway. Ext.P5

complaint is to cancel building permit. However, respondents

4 and 5 are proceeding with the illegal activities.

Respondents 1 to 3 are not taking any preventive steps to

stop the illegal construction.

4. Respondents 4 and 5 filed counter affidavit and

denied the allegations made in the writ petition. The

respondents stated that the plot is a garden land as evidenced

by Ext.R5(h) Possession Certificate. They are constructing

only a residential building. The Panchayat authorities have

made site inspection and issued Ext.R5(j) building permit. WP(C) No.2858/2013

Ext.P3 Memo was issued based on mistaken information. The

Village Officer later gave a correct report Ext.R5(o), and the

RDO ordered to withdraw Stop Memo. The petitioners have

direct road access from their land. The writ petition is

therefore without any merits.

5. The 1st respondent filed counter affidavit and stated

that the Village Officer gave contradictory reports and hence a

report from Tahsildar was obtained. The report stated that a

new pathway has been constructed on the western side of the

property and it is not in a smooth condition. The issue can be

sorted out, but due to the pendency of the writ petition, the

matter is not proceeded with.

6. The 3rd respondent-Panchayat filed counter affidavit

stating that on the basis of the complaints made by the

petitioners, the parties were heard. The 3 rd respondent found

that the complaints are unfounded.

7. Heard.

8. The complaint of the petitioners is that (i) the

petitioners' construction is in violation of building rules. (ii) that WP(C) No.2858/2013

permission from Defence authorities have not been obtained,

(iii) that a pathway has been obstructed and that (iv) paddy

field has been converted.

9. Ext.R5(j) is the building permit granted to the

petitioners. Ext.R5(k) is the approved building plan. There is

nothing on record to show that respondents 4 and 5 are

developing the land which would require a Development

Permit. In the circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the

allegations in the writ petition, regarding Building Rules

violations.

10. As regards the alleged filling up of paddy field,

Ext.R5(h) would show that the land in question is a garden

land. Therefore, there is no question of filling up of paddy field

by the petitioners. To decide the allegation of not obtaining

permission from Defence Authorities, none of the Defence

Officers are made parties to the writ petition. Therefore, the

said issue cannot be adjudicated in this writ petition.

11. Regarding the alleged obstruction of the pathway,

the counter affidavit filed by the 1 st respondent would show WP(C) No.2858/2013

that the Revenue authorities are considering the matter which

can be sorted out and the authorities are not proceeding in

view of the pendency of the writ petition.

In view of all the above facts, no reliefs are

warranted in favour of the petitioners in this writ petition at this

stage. The writ petition is therefore dismissed.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/18.08.2021 WP(C) No.2858/2013

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2858/2013

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.10.2002 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST AND 2ND PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT R.D.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT WITH SKETCH DTD 06.10.12 PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER AFTER INSPECTING THE SITE AND SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED 29.10.12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13.9.12 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS AND OTHER INHABITANTS OF THE LOCALITY BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT SECRETARY OF THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.1.13 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:

Exhibit R3A             TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT
                        NO.86/WCL/12     DATED     6.6.2012    DATED
                        6.6.2012     OF    THE     3RD    RESPONDENT
                        PANCHAYAT
Exhibit R3B             TRUE    COPY      OF     THE     PROCEEDINGS

NO.A6/4587/2012 DATED 15.10.2012 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT-PANCHAYAT Exhibit R3C TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.A4/642/2013 DATED 6.2.2013 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT-PANCHAYAT Exhibit R3D TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 7.2.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit R5A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF NATIONAL AWARD FOR TEACHERS FROM PRESIDENT OF INDIA IN 2002 WP(C) No.2858/2013

Exhibit R5B TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF WON PRISES AT THE NATIONAL AND STATE LEVEL FOR 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit R5C TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF WON PRISES AT THE NATIONAL AND STATE LEVEL FOR 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit R5D TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF WON PRIZES AT THE NATIONAL AND STATE LEVEL FOR 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit R5E TRUE COPY OF THE NEED NO.5/1977 DATED 29.1.1977 OF MALAYINKEEZHU SRO Exhibit R5F TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.577/1994 DATED 16.2.1994 OF MALAYINKEEZHU SRO Exhibit R5G TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.1162 DATED 2.3.2012 OF MALAYINKEEZHU SRO Exhibit R5H TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILAVOORKAL DATED 7.2.2013 Exhibit R5I TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN ARRANGEMENT LETTER SENT BY SBT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit R5J TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT Exhibit R5K TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN Exhibit R5L TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH Exhibit R5M TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.10.2012 Exhibit R5N TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILAVOORKKAL DATED 30.10.2012 Exhibit R5O TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 31.10.2012, SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILAVOORKAL TO THE RDO , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM Exhibit R5P TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE RDO THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILAVOORKAL DATED 1.11.2012 Exhibit R5Q TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER VILAVOORKAL TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 2.11.2012 WP(C) No.2858/2013

Exhibit R5R TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.10.212 ISSUED BY THE VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT Exhibit R5S TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED 6.2.2013 ISSUED BY THE VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH

SR