Vaseem vs Kappur Grama Panchayath
2023 Latest Caselaw 1987 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
   FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 14TH MAGHA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 40482 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          VASEEM
          AGED 30 YEARS
          S/O.ALIMON, IRAVAMKUNNATH HOUSE, KAPPUR, PATTAMBI,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679552
          BY ADVS.
          BABU S. NAIR
          SMITHA BABU

RESPONDENT:

         KAPPUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KUMARANALLUR P.O.,
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678001
         BY ADVS.
         SANTHEEP ANKARATH
         P.ANIRUDHAN(K/002306/2021)


    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 03.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.40482 of 2022       :2:




                           VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
         --     -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
                      W.P.(C). No.40482 of 2022
         --     -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
                 Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2023

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner is in ownership and possession of 2.235 Ares of

properties in Survey No.190/1-3 of the Kappur Village, which was

purchased in the joint name of the petitioner and his wife for the

purpose of construction of a residential house. Ext.P1 is the

possession certificate issued by the village officer. The petitioner

thereafter submitted Ext.P2 application for construction of a

residential house with necessary plans and sketches before the

respondent for the purpose of getting building and development

permit and the said application was rejected by Ext.P3, without

hearing the petitioner and without assigning any reason. The

specific case of the petitioner is that Ext.P3 rejection order was

passed on the basis of a report of the Assistant Engineer, a copy of

which is also not served on the petitioner and that the said

rejection is in violation of Rule 22(3) of the Kerala Panchayat

Building Rules, 2019.

2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent,

who upon instructions submitted that it is true that the petitioner is

not heard before issuing Ext.P3 order and they are prepared to

reconsider the matter.

3. After hearing both sides, I dispose of the writ petition as

follows:

Ext. P3 is set aside and the respondent shall reconsider

Ext.P2 application submitted by the petitioner, within a period of

one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after

affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and after

serving a copy of the order of the Assistant Engineer referred to in

Ext.P3 order.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE sm/

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40482/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTIES ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KAPPUR VILLAGE DATED, 3-12-2021 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED, 19-4-2022