Muhammed Jamaludheen vs The Vythiri Grama Panchayath
2022 Latest Caselaw 9538 Ker

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9538 Ker
Judgement Date : 25 August, 2022

Kerala High Court

Muhammed Jamaludheen vs The Vythiri Grama Panchayath on 25 August, 2022

WP(C) NO. 6670 OF 2020            1



                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
                          WP(C) NO. 6670 OF 2020
PETITIONER/S:

               MUHAMMED JAMALUDHEEN,
               AGED 71 YEARS
               S/O. MOIDUNNI,
               CHERUVATHATTAYIL HOUSE, PUNNAYOORKULAM P O,
               CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

               BY ADV K.RAKESH


RESPONDENT/S:

      1        THE VYTHIRI GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
               VYTHIRI, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673576.

      2        THE SECRETARY
               VYTHIRI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD DISTRICT,
               PIN-673576.

               BY ADV SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY




       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 6670 OF 2020                2




                        P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                    ---------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C) No. 6670 of 2020
                     --------------------------------------
                Dated this the 25th day of August, 2022


                                  JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

"i) Call for the entire records leading to Ext P2 and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders of directions directing the 2nd respondent to renew Exhibit P1 building permit of the petitioner expeditiously as possible within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court;

iii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. [SIC]

2. The petitioner submitted an application for renewal

of Ext.P1 building permit and the 2 nd respondent as per Ext.P2

declined to renew the permit stating that the property is

included in the draft statement of Vythiri Taluk Land Board and

hence, the application for renewal cannot be considered. The

petitioner submitted that Ext.P2 is illegal and the 2 nd

respondent erred in not renewing the permit when the

construction is underway. The petitioner is also relying on

Ext.P3 judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, in which

this Court directed the local authority to issue occupancy

certificate to the building subject to the proceedings under the

Land Reforms Act.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. This Court perused Ext.P2 order. The only reason for

rejecting the renewal application is that the property is

included in the draft statement of the Land Board. That is not a

ground to reject the renewal application, in the light of Ext. P3

judgment. The Panchayat is bound to issue renewal of the

building permit, if it is otherwise in order, subject to any

proceedings under the Land Reforms Act.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following

manner :

1) Ext.P2 is set aside.

2) The respondents are directed to reconsider the

application for renewal of the building permit dehors

the reasons mentioned in Ext.P2, if it is otherwise in

order.

3) The orders should be passed in the renewal

application as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,

within one month from the date of receipt of a copy

of this judgment.