[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Rukhiya Kadar vs State Of Kerala on 21 January, 2026
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
2026:KER:4985
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 1ST MAGHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 40458 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
RUKHIYA KADAR,
AGED 62 YEARS,
W/O.KADAR PILLAI,
CC 31/566, RUKIYABAG, ROYAL LANE, KADAVANTHRA
P.O., ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682020.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SAJI.P.JOSEPH
SHRI.C.C.MATHEW
SMT.A.SEENA
SRI.K.T.SAJU
SMT.SALI P.MATHEW
SHRI.DEEPESH E.S
SMT.G.MINI (PALATH)
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
FORT KOCHI, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682001.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KUMBALAM VILLAGE, KUMBALAM P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 68200.
W.P(C)No.40458 of 2023 2 2026:KER:4985
4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, KUMBALAM,PANANGAD P.O.,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682506.
5 THE SECRETARY,
KUMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
KUMBALAM PANCHAYAT OFFICE, MADAVANA,
PANANGAD ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682506.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN
SMT.S.INDU
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI K JANARDHANA SHENOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 21.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P(C)No.40458 of 2023 3 2026:KER:4985
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
----------------------------------------
WP (C)No.40458 of 2023
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2026
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition was filed with following
prayers.
"1.Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ or directions quashing EXHIBIT
P8.
2. Issue a writ to declare that the petitioner is
entitled to construct fencing along the northern
and western boundary of the property covered
by Ext.P1 to protect the aquaculture cultivation
carrying out in the field.
3. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or directions commanding the
5th respondent to consider the application for
permit to construct compound wall dated
01.02.2022, afresh and dispose it expeditiously,
as per law.
4. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or directions commanding the
5th respondent not to proceed against the
petitioner on the basis of Exhibit P5.
5. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or directions commanding the
respondents not to proceed against the
petitioner on the basis of the observations
W.P(C)No.40458 of 2023 4 2026:KER:4985
made in Exhibit P5.
6. Grant such other orders or directions that the
honorable court may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the above case.
7. This honourable court may be pleased to
dispense with the filing of translation of
vernacular documents."
(SIC)
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P8.
The main grievance of the petitioner is that, it is an
order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner. Petitioner submitted an application for
the construction of a compound wall on the two sides of
his property, aqua-cultural farm. The same is rejected
without hearing the petitioner.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner, and the learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the Panchayat.
4. The short point raised by the petitioner
is that Ext.P8 order is an order passed without hearing
the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the Panchayat submitted that a counter
W.P(C)No.40458 of 2023 5 2026:KER:4985
affidavit is filed by the panchayat and submitted that
no hearing is necessary for considering the building
permit application. But, the learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that he may be able to
substantiate his case, if an opportunity of hearing is
given. In such circumstances, I think, Ext.P8 can be set
aside and the building permit application can be
reconsidered after giving an opportunity of hearing to
the petitioner.
5. I make it clear that, I have not
considered the matter on merit and Panchayat is free
to pass orders, in accordance with law.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with
following directions;
(i) Ext.P8 is set aside.
(ii)The 5th respondent is directed to reconsider the
building permit application submitted by the
petitioner after giving an opportunity of hearing
W.P(C)No.40458 of 2023 6 2026:KER:4985
to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within a period of thirty days from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
ANA
W.P(C)No.40458 of 2023 7 2026:KER:4985
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 40458 OF 2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.
1015/2012 DATED 27.03.2012
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION OF COASTAL AQUACULTURE
FARM DATED 22.05.2017
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
DATED 29.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION PLAN
CERTIFICATE DATED 29.01.2022 ISSUED BY
THE THIRD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
17.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
09.02.2022
Exhibit P7 THE PHOTOGRAPHS TO SHOW TRUE LIE AND
NATURE OF THE PROPERTY OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P8 CONTEXT A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS
DATED 21.02.2022 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
