Sajith P vs Malappuram Municipality
2023 Latest Caselaw 120 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                       PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

                FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 16TH POUSHA, 1944

                                WP(C) NO. 37251 OF 2022

PETITIONER/S:

            SAJITH P.
            AGED 34 YEARS
            S/O LATE BALACHANDRAN, PACHATH HOUSE, MUNDUPARAMBA PO,
            MALAPPURAM DT., PIN - 676509

            BY ADVS.
            T.K.AJITH KUMAR
            AISWARYA RAMESAN
            HARITHA HARIDAS



RESPONDENTS:

     1       MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALAPPURAM PO, MALAPPURAM DT., PIN -
             67650

     2       THE SECRETARY
             MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY, MALAPPURAM PO, MALAPPURAM DT. , PIN - 676505

            BY ADVS.
            SHRI.E.S.M.KABEER,SC,MALAPPURAM MUNICIPA
            ABDUL RASHEED K I
            DEEPA SASIDHARAN(K/000119/2018)




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.01.2023, THE

COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 37251 OF 2022
                                  2

                        JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging

Ext.P5 notice issued by the 2nd respondent directing the

petitioner to get necessary permission from the RDO with

regard to the classification of his property.

2. According to the petitioner, no such permission

is required for constructing a residential building having

a maximum area of 120 Sq.Meters in a maximum extent

of 4.05 Ares of land in view Section 27A(6) of the

Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for

short 'the Act'). According to him, the 2nd respondent has

issued Ext.P5 without reference to the provisions under

Section 27A(6) of the Act and without due application of

mind.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Standing counsel for the respondents.

4. From Ext.P5, it is evident that the 2nd

respondent has not adverted to the provisions of Section WP(C) NO. 37251 OF 2022

27A(6) of the Act and other relevant materials.

Accordingly, I am of the view that Ext.P5 requires a revisit.

For the said purpose, Ext.P5 is set aside. The 2 nd

respondent shall consider Ext.P4 application of the

petitioner for building permit in the light of the provisions

under Section 27A(6) of the Act and pass appropriate

orders after affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner. This shall be done within a period of three

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-

WP(C) NO. 37251 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37251/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO. 2959/2022 DATED 20.8.2022 OF SRO, MALAPPURAM.

Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 21.9.2022.

Exhibit-P3 THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATABANK .

Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT DATED 10.10.2022.

Exhibit-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. RBA 123/22-23 DATED 04.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT .