ASSAINAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the owner of 3.54 Ares of property in Resurvey No.67/9 of Keecheri Village, within the limits of the Amballur Panchayath, Ernakulam District. Petitioner has apparently submitted an application before the Revenue Divisional Officer, seeking permission for utilisation of the property for different purposes other than paddy cultivation and agricultural operations. Application was submitted before the Panchayath seeking building permit and approval of the building plan. At that point of time, petitioner has approached this Court and secured a judgment whereby, the RDO was directed to take appropriate decision in the application submitted by the petitioner. Ext.P7 is the order passed thereunder dated 2.3.2012, whereby, a direction is issue to the Panchayath secretary to take necessary action considering the building permit application submitted by the petitioner. As per Ext.P8 the secretary of the panchayath has decided not to grant license to the petitioner. It is thus challenging Ext.P8 and seeking other consequential reliefs, this writ petition is filed.

(2.) A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the third respondent refuting the allegations, claims and demands raised by the petitioner.

(3.) It is also pointed out that, the property is included in the data bank as 'converted paddy land'. In view of the statutory prohibitions contained under the Kerala Panchayath Building Rules, 2011, petitioner will have to secure necessary orders from the respective statutory authorities for utilising the property, which is remaining as a paddy filed in the village records and the BTR. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of with suitable direction enabling the petitioner to move necessary application before the statutory authority.