Kerala High Court
Jose vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1943
WP(C).No.18086 OF 2016(I)
PETITIONER:
JOSE
AGED 52, S/O.PAILAN, CHERATTA HOUSE, MUPLIYAM,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, 680312
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LOCAL
SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
2 THE VARNDARAPPILLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VARANDARAPPILLY PO,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680303
SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE,SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
26.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.18086 OF 2016(I) 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 26th day of March 2021
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus
to the Secretary of the Varandarappilly Grama Panchayat to number the
building of the petitioner as is seen in Exhibit P5 photograph within a
stipulated time limit.
2. According to the petitioner, the construction of the residential building was
completed prior to 2008, during which period, the Kerala Municipality Building Rules,
1999 was extended to the Panchayat area. Anyhow, subsequently in 2011, the State
Government have framed the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. If the
contention of the petitioner that the construction was carried out prior to 2008 is
found to be correct, then the petitioner is entitled to get the building numbered,
irrespective of the extension of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 in the
year 2008 or the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011, but it is a factual aspect to
be deciphered by a fact finding body in accordance with law.
3. To put it short, the petitioner is not at liberty to invoke the jurisdiction of
this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to identify the said situation.
Learned counsel for petitioner has also submitted that the property in question is
included in the data bank constituted as per the provisions of the Kerala Conservation
of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008.
4. Anyhow that is a subject matter to be sorted out by invoking the provisions
of Act, 2008. Since I find that a building was constructed by the petitioner, it is only
appropriate that, a liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the Secretary of the
Grama Panchayat with suitable and sufficient documents, enabling the Secretary to
consider and identify the issue as to whether the construction was carried out by the
petitioner prior to the year 2008.
5. I n that view of the matter, after hearing learned counsel for petitioner, this
writ petition is disposed of, directing the Secretary of the Varandarappilly Grama
Panchayat, Thrissur, to receive a representation from the petitioner, if submitted
within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and attain
finality to the same at the earliest possible time and at any rate within two months
thereafter. However, I make it clear that, I have not expressed any opinion in respect
of the aspects pointed out by the petitioner in regard to the inclusion of the property
in question in the data bank constituted as per the provisions of Act, 2008.
Needless to say, if the petitioner makes any application in accordance with the
provisions of Act, 2008, I have no reason to think that the said authority will not
consider the application in accordance with law.
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
smv JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO.
1072/92 OF THE KODALI SRO DATED 22.04.92
P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN THE
NAME OF THE PETITIONER DATED 28.4.2015.
P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, VARANDARAPPILLLY
DATED 18.10.2011
P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
DATA BANK ISSUED DATED 09.03.2015
P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY THE
PETITIONER DATED NIL
