SECRETARY, PORUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT Vs. P MAHABOOB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner Panchayat seeking to quash Ext.P8 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram in appeal No.1010/2013 filed by the respondent herein, whereby it is held that the inaction on the part of the Panchayat in issuing the occupancy to the respondent herein cannot be tolerated, and the respondent is entitled to secure deemed occupancy in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. Brief material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

(2.) The respondent was issued with Ext.P3 building permit on 08.09.2010 for the construction of a residential building with a setback of 3 metres from PutiyathkunnuNaypally road as shown in Ext.P2 plan submitted along with Ext.P1 application seeking building permit. After completion of the construction, respondent applied for occupancy certificate and numbering of the building. But, when the ward clerk of the petitioner Panchayat conducted inspection, it was found that the boundary of the property was not clearly demarcated. Subsequently, when the property was surveyed, it was found that, only 2 metres front open yard was there abutting the aforesaid road, which is in violation of the approved building plan. Hence, the application for occupancy certificate was rejected as per Ext.P6 order dated 28.09.2013. However, respondent had not challenged the said order and it has become final. Instead, respondent has submitted Ext.P7 letter to the petitioner Panchayat, contending that the respondent had failed to produce the completion certificate and plan along with the application for numbering the building. Subsequently, respondent approached the Tribunal, and the Tribunal as per Ext.P8 order confirmed the deemed occupancy, which according to the petitioner, without properly appreciating the facts of the case.

(3.) It is also submitted that, the Tribunal even went to the extent of holding that the road in question abutting the petitioner's property is not a notified Panchayat road. It is also submitted that, the Tribunal also failed to note that, since the Kerala Municipality Building Rules were made applicable to the Panchayat in the year 2007, the setback of 3 metres was mandatory and Ext.P6 has also became final. These are the background facts projected by the petitioner to secure the reliefs sought for in the writ petition.