CHACKO JEGAN Vs. ALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had obtained Ext.P1 building permit in the year 2013, for construction of a godown on land belonging to the petitioner including land in Sy.No.439/2 of Alangad Village of Paravur Taluk, Ernakulam District. It is the case of the petitioner that, at the time of applying for the building permit, the Panchayat had obtained Ext.P2 report from the Agricultural Officer, to the effect that the land included in Sy.No.439/2 was not included in the Draft Data Bank prepared for the region. It was acting on the basis of Ext.P2 that the Panchayat issued Ext.P1 building permit to the petitioner, and on the strength of which, the petitioner proceeded to construct the construction of two commercial godowns in the lands including the land in Sy.No.439/2. After the completion of construction, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 application dated 10.6.2016 before the respondent Panchayat, for allotting a building number to the completed construction. The said application was rejected by the respondent Panchayat by Ext.P5 order dated 2.7.2016, stating that the application submitted by the petitioner was incomplete. Immediately before that, on 1.7.2016, the petitioner was served with Ext.P6 stop memo which directed the petitioner to stop further construction in the property inter alia on the ground that the validity period of the building permit that was granted to the petitioner in 2013, had since expired, and further that the petitioner had not produced the necessary No Objection Certificates [NOC] from the Fire and Safety Department for considering his application for numbering of the building. The petitioner relies on Ext.P7 and P7(2) NOCs issued by the Fire and Safety Department to contend that the second reason cited in Ext.P6 stop memo did not actually exist in the light of the said NOCs issued by the Fire and Safety Department. As regards the ground that the validity period of the building permit had expired, the petitioner submits that he had since preferred Ext.P8 application for renewal of the permit for, the limited purposes of keeping the validity of the permit alive till such time as he obtained a building number. By Exts.P9 and P10, the application for renewal of permit was rejected by the respondent Panchayat, inter alia, on the contention that the property of the petitioner falling in Sy.No.439/2 was included in the modified Data Bank prepared for the region. It is aggrieved by Exts.P9 and P10 as also the issuance of Ext.P6 stop memo that the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition.

(2.) In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Panchayat, the stand taken is that, in the additional Draft Data Bank that was prepared for the region, the land falling in Sy.No.439/2 was included and shown as 'Nilam'. The rejection orders, namely, Exts.P9 and P10 are sought to be justified on the basis of the reasons stated therein, and in the light of the entries in the Draft Data Bank prepared for the region.

(3.) When the matter came up for admission, this Court had called for a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [LLMC] as regards the nature and lie of the land. Through a report that has since been filed by the LLMC, based on the satellite image studies done by the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Center [KSREC], it is stated that the satellite images indicated that the land in Sy.No.439/2 is converted paddy land, but the conversion took place only after 2012, and not prior to that date. The suggestion therefore is that the land in Sy.No.439/2 was 'paddy land' as on the date of commencement of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.