Mujeeb Rahman v. The Kuruva Grama Panchayath

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/22ND KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 31012 of 2014 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- MUJEEB RAHMAN AGED 36 YEARS S/O.CHERIYA MUHAMMED, MALIAMPADATHU HOSUE PANG CHENDI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 338. BY ADVS.SRI.K.ABDUL JAWAD SRI.ABDUL MAJEED.N SMT.VINEETHA V.KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. THE KURUVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PADAPPARAMBU VATTALOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 507.

2. THE SECRETARY THE KURUVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PADAPPARAMBU VATTALOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 507.

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 1311-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 31012 of 2014 (B) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY HIS PREDECESSOR-IN-INTEREST ON 16/09/2002. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF DATA BANK PREPARED BY THE KURUVA VILLAGE.

EXT.3. TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 15/12/2012 EVIDENCING THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 21/5/2014. EXT.P5. TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE FRONT AND REAR VIEW OF THE PETITIONER'S LAND AND PARTLY CONSTRUCTED BUILDING. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------------------NIL TRUE COPY SKS P.A TO JUDGE

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

-------------------------------------- W.P(C)NO. 31012 OF 2014 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of November, 2015

JUDGMENT

The property has been described as garden land in Ext.P1 sale deed. Ext.P2 data bank shows that a major portion of the property in survey No.438/1 of Kuruva Village is converted land. Ext.P5 photograph shows that the property in the neighbourhood is developed and buildings constructed.

2.

This Court has time and again held that the ground reality should be assessed in the circumstances. The mere fact that the property was described as wet land in the revenue records is of no consequence. I quash Ext.P4 order declining building permit to the petitioner as sought. The second respondent shall reconsider the application with notice to the petitioner and pass orders thereon within a period of one month. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE sks