Jose P.Y vs The District Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 7388 Ker

WP(C) NO. 17317 OF 2022            1



                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
       FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
                          WP(C) NO. 17317 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

               JOSE P.Y.
               AGED 59 YEARS
               RESIDING AT 41 BLESSINGS, LINK VALLEY
               KUSUMAGIRI P.O.
               ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

               BY ADVS.
               C.G.PREETHA
               N.G.ANITHA
               DR.ABHILASH O.U.



RESPONDENT/S:

      1        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
               COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD
               ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

      2        THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
               FORT KOCHI REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR
               KB JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI
               KOCHI, PIN - 682001

      3        THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
               NGO QUARTERS - MAVELIPURAM ROAD, THRIKKAKARA
               KAKKANAD P.O.
               ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

      4        THE VILLAGE OFFICER
               KAKKANAD VILLAGE OFFICE, THRIKKAKARA
               KAKKANAD P.O.
               ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

      5        THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
 WP(C) NO. 17317 OF 2022                 2


               KRISHI BHAVAN, THRIKKAKKARA
               KUNNUMPURAM - CIVIL STATION ROAD
               THRIKKAKARA, KAKKANAD
               ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

               BY ADV S.JAMAL, SC, THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY



OTHER PRESENT:

               SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP




       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    24.06.2022,         THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 17317 OF 2022                3




                         P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   --------------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C.) No. 17317 of 2022
                      --------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022


                                    JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

"i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass order on Ext P6 application for building permit without insisting to have the reference of nilam removed from the revenue records within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent to issue orders on Ext P7 Form 6 application within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court iii. To issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." [SIC]

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of building

permit for an extension of petitioner's residential building. The

3rd respondent denied permit on the basis of inclusion of

petitioner's property in the data bank and the reference of the

property as nilam in the revenue records This is being done

when the petitioner's property already has a house extending

689 sq.feet in it constructed in the year 1999. According to the

petitioner, he is the absolute owner in possession and

enjoyment of 1.63 ares of land comprised in Survey No.674/2-

6+-0 Block No.9 of Kakkanad Village, Kanayannur Taluk,

Ernakulam District. The aforementioned property is included in

the Data Bank prepared with respect to Kakkanad Village

under Thrikkakara Municipality. The revenue records with

respect to the property shows the land as "Nilam". According

to the petitioner, the property is actually a garden land with a

building of 689 sq.feet in it and is situated in a residential cum

commercial area. The property is part of a villa project of the

builders Link India Realtors Private Limited. The petitioner

wanted to extend the building and applied for building permit

before the Thrikkakara Municipality. It was then informed to

the petitioner that the property is included in the Data Bank

with remarks "Flat" and also the property is mentioned as

"Nilam" in the revenue records. It was informed that the

petitioner has to get the entry in revenue records corrected to

get the building permit. According to the petitioner, he is

entitled to get the building permit without insisting to get the

entries corrected. It is stated by the petitioner that the wrong

entry with respect to the subject property as nilam in the

revenue records is liable to be corrected. As a matter of

precaution, the petitioner filed Form 6 application on 9.3.2022.

It is submitted by the petitioner that this application submitted

for regularisation of conversion is pending consideration before

the 2nd respondent. This writ petition is filed for a direction to

the 3rd respondent to take necessary steps to issue the building

permit without insisting to have the wrong entry of nilam

corrected in the revenue records. Alternatively there is a

prayer to issue direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and

pass orders on Ext.P7 within a time limit.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned counsel for the respondents.

4. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner already

constructed a building in the year 1999. Now, the proposal is

only an additional construction of the ground floor and the

upstair. It is the case of the respondents that the additional

construction will exceeds the appurtenant land. Admittedly, the

property is included in the Data Bank. The petitioner submitted

Ext.P7 application, Form 6 for the correction of the entry in the

revenue records. In such circumstances, according to me,

Ext.P7 can be directed to dispose within a time frame and

based on the decision, the Municipality can take appropriate

steps.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the

following directions :

1) The 2nd respondent is directed to consider and pass

appropriate orders on Ext.P7 as expeditiously as possible,

at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment.

2) Based on the decision taken by the 2 nd respondent, the 3rd

respondent will consider the building permit application

of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. While

considering Form-6 application, the 2nd respondent will

take a lenient view in the light of the contention raised by

the petitioner in this case. I make it clear that this need

not be taken as a precedent.

SD/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17317/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE REVENUE RECORDS WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY SHOWS THE LAND AS "NILAM". THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30.12.2021

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 31.12.2021

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY THE SECRETARY, THEN THRIKKAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 30.10.1999

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 18.11.2000

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE DATA BANK WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 20.01.2022

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 6 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.03.2022