Aleyamma Kuriakose vs Arun Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 3505 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
         TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1944
                      CON.CASE(C) NO. 2043 OF 2021
     AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN RP 205/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA


PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN R.P./PETITIONER IN W.P.(C):

             ALEYAMMA KURIAKOSE,
             AGED 54 YEARS
             W/O. KURIAKOSE, METHAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MALAM P.O.,
             MANARCADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM, TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

             BY ADV P.I.GEORGEKUTTY


RESPONDENT SECRETARY/PETITIONER IN R.P./2ND RESPONDENT:

     1       ARUN KUMAR
             AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
             SECRETARY MANARCADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MANARCADU P.O.,
             MANARCADU KARA AND VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

  ADDL.R2    BIJU THOMAS MATHEW
             AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
             SECRETARY, MANARCADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
             MANARCADU P.O, MANARCADU KARA AND VILLAGE,
             KOTTAYAM-686001(CONTEMNOR)
             ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD 17/12/2021 IN IA 1/21
             IN COC 2043/2021

             BY ADV SURIN GEORGE IPE


     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CON.CASE(C) NO. 2043 OF 2021
                                   2



                             JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the judgment

of this Court was reviewed by this Court vide order dated

17.02.2020, whereby direction was issued to the Grama Panchayath,

to consider the application of the petitioner for issuance of a building

permit in accordance with law. As per the reply, decision has been

taken and the land is 'Nilam' and therefore, the building permit

cannot be issued. Accordingly, the application of the petitioner for

issuance of building permit has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

direction has not been complied with in letter and spirit but do not

deny the fact that the order has been passed.

I am of the view that once the direction was given to deal with

the application in accordance with law, petitioner is at liberty to

challenge the outcome in accordance with law, if need be. Contempt

petition is closed. Rules stand discharged.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE nak CON.CASE(C) NO. 2043 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2043/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN WPC NO. 30908 OF 2013 DATED 7.1.2020.

Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN R.P. NO. 205 OF 2020 DATED 17.2.2020.

Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION DATED 27.7.2020.

Annexure B-1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14-07-2020 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Annexure B-2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07-08-2020 ADDRESSED TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANARCADU VILLAGE ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

Annexure B-3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13-08-2020 SENT BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANARCADU ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

Annexure B-4 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 12.08.2020 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

Annexure B-5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 17.08.2020 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.