SULAIMAN K.A Vs. WADAKKANCHERY MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner owns an item of property, which, as per the revenue records, is a paddy land. The petitioner had obtained a building permit for construction of a residential building in the said property. Though the building permit was for construction of a residential building, the petitioner had constructed a residential cum commercial building in the property. The Municipality, however, has not numbered the building for two reasons, viz (1) that the construction is not in accordance with the building permit and (2) that the property is a paddy land. The petitioner then preferred an application before the additional second respondent under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 for permission to use the property for other purposes.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for the Municipality.

(3.) It is beyond dispute that the property of the petitioner is not one included in the Data Bank prepared under the Act. In so far as the property of the petitioner is not included in the Data Bank prepared under the Act, the petitioner is entitled to make use of the property for other purposes including construction of commercial buildings [ See Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector (2015 (3) KLT 182)]. It is seen that Ext.P8 decision has been taken by the additional second respondent without adverting to the fact that the petitioner had already constructed a residential cum commercial building in the property.