Kerala High Court
Augusty vs The State Of Kerala on 1 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 4 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
AUGUSTY
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. MANIVELIL JOSEPH,
EDAMARUKU KARA,
UDUMPANNUR VILLAGE,
CHEENIKUZHI P.O.,
THODUPUZHA TALUK - 685 595.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE KARIMANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
P.O.KARIMANNOOR,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 581.
R1 BY SRI. K.P. HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R2 BY ADVS.SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY
SRI.MATHEW JOHN K
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016
2
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking
the following reliefs:-
"i). call for the records leading to Ext.P7 and may be
pleased to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the same.
ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ order or direction commanding the
second respondent to immediately number the building
of the petitioner constructed in terms of Ext.P1, in the
interest of justice."
2. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner
has carried out construction of a building after
securing Ext.P1 permit from the Secretary of the
Karimannoor Grama Panchayat - the second
respondent herein. It is the further case of the
petitioner that the construction was carried out in
accordance with the permit and plan approved by
the Secretary. However, building is not assigned
with a number. But at the same time, the Secretary
of the Grama Panchayat has issued various
communications to the petitioner stating that the
W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016
construction carried out by the petitioner is
violative of Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat
Raj Act, 1994.
3. From the perusal of the documents
produced by the petitioner, it is quite clear and
evident that the petitioner has not submitted any
reply to the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat in
spite of the Secretary issuing a notice and pointing
out that the construction is violative of
Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act,
1994. Whatever that be, when a building
construction is completed after securing a building
permit, the building owner has to necessarily
submit a completion certificate as prescribed under
the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 and seek
occupancy. At that point of time, the Secretary has
to necessarily conduct due inspection and find out
as to whether the building is constructed in
W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016
accordance with the building permit and as per the
provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994
and the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. The
petitioner has no case in this writ petition that after
the construction of the building, the petitioner has
approached the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat
with a completion certificate in order to secure
occupancy certificate and building number. Even
though petitioner has produced Ext.P2 demand
raised, as if to appear that the Panchayat has
raised the demand, in fact Ext.P2 is a demand
notice raised by the Thahsildar as per Section 3 of
the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, which has
nothing to do with the illegality in construction.
4. In that view of the matter, I do not think
that the petitioner is entitled to get any relief as
sought for by the petitioner. Therefore, the reliefs
sought for in the writ petition are declined.
W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016
However, petitioner is granted with a liberty to
approach the Secretary with an application for
issuing occupancy certificate along with all the
other attendant documents. If any such application
is submitted within a period of one month from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the said
application shall be finalised by the Secretary, in
accordance with law, after providing an opportunity
of participation to the petitioner herein within two
months thereafter.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY
JUDGE
DCS/01.07.2022
W.P.(C.) No. 4/2016
APPENDIX
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT GRANTED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 30.5.2012.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED
BY THE TALUK OFFICE THODUPPZHA DT.
26.2.2014.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT IN THE
NAME OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE
KARIMANNOOR VILLAGE OFFICE DT.
18.3.2014.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY
THE LAND SURVEYOR DT. 07.4.2014.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO.
1676/2014 DT. 27.5.2014 OF THE KARIKODE
S.R.O.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE
2ND RESPONDENT DT. 04.3.2014.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED NIL
