N. SURESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is challenging Ext.P6 Zoning Regulations of the Development Plan for Changanacherry Municipality and Ext.P4 order passed by the second respondent and Ext.P5 consequential notice issued by the 5th respondent to the extent it insists of 12 metre wide gate for a construction of a building above 100 sq. metres in the residential zone.

(2.) THE petitioner alleges that he is the owner in possession of 1 hectares 75 Ares and 49 sq. metres of property situated in Changanacherry Village having a road frontage of 32.75 metres abutting Alappuzha -Changanacherry Highway and the Highway is having a road width of more than 30 metres. The petitioner's project was a venture in Tourism sector, approved by the Government of Kerala in the "Global Investors meet" which was kicked off by the Stage Government during the year 2002. On 10.10.2005, the second respondent approved the layout by Order No. C3/6645/05/DDS. Consequently on 15.3.2006, the 5th respondent issued a building permit to construct a building having a total area of 2510 sq. metres. On the basis of the approval and permit, the petitioner constructed the building. Later, the petitioner further conducted an additional construction in the aforesaid property having a total plinth area of 1145.25 sq. metres. After several rounds of litigation, the petitioner filed a fresh application for regularization. The second respondent issued various queries to the application which were all complied with by the petitioner and finally, the second respondent issued Ext.P4. In query No. 3 issued by the second respondent in Ext.P4, a demand was raised to make sure that the width of the gate in the petitioner's property should be 12 metres. Later, the 5th respondent issued Ext.P5 re -iterating query No. 3 in Ext.P4. The above query was issued depending a restrictive clause in Ext.P6 development plan of Changanassery which itself is not sustainable. The petitioner's property which is abutting the A.C. Road with a frontage of 32 metres does not require any further access through any property bounding some others property. The respondents cannot insist for improving the size of the gate towards the plot. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

(3.) AS per Rule 143, Chapter 20 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, the Secretary of the concerned Municipality have power to regularize construction or re -construction or addition or alteration of any building or digging of any well, if shall not be in violation of any of the provisions of the Act and Rules, for which the petitioner has to comply the above 12 conditions. The above conditions are stipulated only in accordance with the Kerala Municipality Building Rules and considering the provisions of the Development Plan for Changanassery. The petitioner has not so far complied the above conditions. Without complying the above conditions, respondents 1 to 3 were not in a position to approve the lay out of the above constructions; it was contended.