SAMEER Vs. MALAPPURAM MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICATION for Building Permit submitted by the petitioners for construction of residential building has been rejected by the respondent Municipality through Ext.P3. The reason mentioned in Ext.P3 is that the property is paddy field. Contention of the petitioner is that the physical nature of the land remains as pucca garden land (dry land) converted long back. Exhibits P1 and P2 possession certificates were produced, in which it is noticed that the property is included in the data bank prepared under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 as "fully converted before 16 years". It is also contended that the property is surrounded by various constructions both residential and commercial. Under the above mentioned circumstances it is contended that the rejection on the ground that the property is paddy field cannot be sustained.

(2.) HEARD; counsel for the petitioner and Sri. E.S.M. Kabeer appearing for the respondent Municipality. The legal issue involved stands settled through various decisions of this court, including Shahanaz Shukoor V. Chelannoor Grama Panchayat (2009 (3) KLT 899), Praveen V. Land Revenue Commissioner (2010 (2) KHC 499) and Jafarkhan V. K.A. Kochumakkar and others (2012 (1) KHC 523 (DB).

(3.) A decision in this regard shall be taken at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.