Cyril Philip vs Serena Abdul Azeez
2023 Latest Caselaw 3837 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1945
                 CON.CASE(C) NO. 172 OF 2022
       AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 17575/2017 OF
                    HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

          CYRIL PHILIP
          AGED 48 YEARS
          S/O.PHILIP, MADATHIL HOUSE, MELUKAVU KARA,
          MELUKAVU VILLAGE, MELUKAVUMATTOM P.O. - 686 652 ,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR)
          N.RAJESH
          GOPAKUMAR P.


RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

          SERENA ABDUL AZEEZ
          AGE, FATHER'S NAME, HOUSE NAME ETC NOT KNOWN
          SECRETARY, MELUKAVU GRAMA PANCHYAYATH,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 652.

          BY ADVS.
          SAJU JOHN
          JELSON J.EDAMPADAM(K/449/2009)


     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C) No.172 of 2022

                                 2


                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of March, 2023

This Court, as per judgment dated 07.10.2021 in W.P.

(C) No.17575 of 2017, directed the 2 nd respondent to consider

Ext.P5 application of the petitioner and take a decision on

assignment of Number to the building, taking into

consideration Exts.P12 to P15 documents and also the

proviso to Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the

specific finding made in the writ petition, the respondent has

rejected his application for assigning number as per

Annexure-A4 communication dated 15.03.2023.

3. Counsel for the petitioner argued that this Court in

the judgment in W.P.(C) No.17575 of 2017 has come to a

specific conclusion that there was a building in existence even

prior to 1994 when the Panchayat Raj Act came into force. In

such circumstances, the respondent could not have rejected

his application relying on violation of the Building Rules which Con.Case(C) No.172 of 2022

came into force only in the year 1994. The respondent by

Annexure-A4, has deliberately shown disobedience to the

orders of this Court and the respondent is therefore liable to

be proceeded against under the Contempt of Court Act, 1971,

contended the petitioner.

4. Standing Counsel representing the respondent

entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. On behalf

of the respondent, it is submitted that the applicability of

Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act stands

excluded in the matter. However, even if a building was

existing prior to 1994, since the application for

occupancy/Numbering is made by the petitioner only recently,

such an application can be considered only on the basis of the

Rules existing as on the date of the application.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Standing Counsel representing the

respondent.

6. The judgment in W.P.(C) No.17575 of 2017 would

show that this Court only came to certain prima facie Con.Case(C) No.172 of 2022

conclusions regarding the claims of the petitioner and the

matter was left to the respondent-Secretary to the Grama

Panchayat to consider and take a decision based on Exts.P12

to P15 documents. Annexure-A4 communication dated

15.03.2023 has been passed adverting those certain

proceedings.

7. In view of the above, if the petitioner has any

grievance relating to Annexure-A4, the petitioner has to take

up the same in accordance with law. There is no prima facie

contempt involved in the matter, since the respondent has

passed Annexure-A4 order.

Accordingly, the Contempt of Court Case is dismissed,

granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge Annexure-A4

communication dated 15.03.2023 in accordance with law, if

the petitioner is so advised.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk Con.Case(C) No.172 of 2022

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 172/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.17575/2017 DATED 7/10/21.

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF RESPONDENT BEARING NO.A4-2737/21 DATED 22/12/21. Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED LEASE DEED BEARING NO.1284 DATED 19.7.2002 Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.A4-2737/2021 DATED 15.3.2023 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A4-2737/2021 DATED 15.03.2023 OF THE SECRETARY.