K.P.AYYAPPAN Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

(2.) The petitioner is the absolute owner in possession of 28.90 Ares of property comprised in resurvey no.791/13 and Re Sy.No.791/14 in Block No.36 of Karipoor Village, Thiruvananthapuram. It is the case of the petitioner that the property of the petitioner was converted from Nilam to Purayidam much before the purchase of the property. But the category of the above property is shown as Nilam in the BTR. The above property is not included in the data bank and remains as unnotified land. During the year 2002, the petitioner obtained building permit from the 2nd respondent municipality for the construction of a hospital building as evident by Ext.P1. The petitioner obtained extension of Ext.P1 permit for a period of 3 years. But as the petitioner could not start the work of first floor within that time, the permit for the work of first floor was again extended further for a period of 3 years. But due to huge financial stringency, the petitioner could not complete the work of first floor within that extended period. It is the case of the petitioner that he is conducting the said hospital for the past 20 years and now due to the lack of space, the petitioner is constrained to extend the hospital building further. So the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent Municipality seeking permit for construction of first floor in the existing building which was actually included in the initial Ext.P1 permit for construction itself. The 2nd respondent issued a communication stating that as the petitioner's property is shown as Nilam in the Revenue Records and not included in the data bank, the petitioner should approach the 3rd respondent and submit an application under Sec. 27(A) of the Kerala Conservation of Wetland and Paddy land Act, 2008 (for short, the Act 2008). The Act 2008 came into force only in the year 2011 and the land in question was converted much prior to the enactment. Hence this writ petition is filed seeking an order to quash Ext.P6, Ext.P7, Ext.P9 and Ext.P11 and for a declaration that an application u/s Sec. 27 A of the Act 2008 is not necessary for granting Ext.P3 building permit.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.