SHAHANAZ SHUKKOOR Vs. CHELANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOTICE was issued on this Writ Petition to the respondents with hearing date fixed as 13. 7. 2009. The matter was listed in court on 13. 8. 2009. Though service is complete, none appeared for the respondents. The matter was adjourned awaiting appearance. Even today, none appears for the respondents.

(2.) PERUSED the materials and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) THE petitioner purchased a building, which was shown in the assessment register of the 1st respondent Panchayat. She, thereafter, paid property tax in her own name. Later, she applied for building permit for construction of yet another building in the plot. That is rejected as per Ext. P12 on the ground that the land is shown in the revenue records as 'nilam' and, therefore, the petitioner has to apply for permission to convert such user, if she wants to put up abuilding. In Ext. P 12, it is also notified that such decision has to be taken by a committee consisting of different persons and that such conversion will be granted only to build a home for a homeless person. Alleging that, the petitioner started construction without obtaining permit, Ext. P 13 is issued on the ground that the building would be an unauthorised one. The petitioner, through the materials on record, has demonstration to the satisfaction of this Court that the immediately surrounding lands have also, either buildings standing thereon, or have buildings being constructed with the permission of the Panchayat. The petitioner's plea, on facts, stands uncontraverted. Not only that, the mere description of an item of property as 'nilam' (paddy field) or wetland, in the revenue records, is insufficient to assume that the land cannot be used for any purpose other than those for which a paddy field or wetland can be used. This is because the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, deals with the conversion of lands, which are wetland or paddy fields, on the basis of the actual fact situation and not depending on the description of the property in the revenue records. The definition of the terms 'paddy field' and 'wetland' in the said Act is sufficient material to hold that the said statute operates on the basis of the facts as they exist on ground realties and not on any quality or type of land, depending on its description in the title document. On facts, it having been shown that the land in question is surrounded by lands on which buildings were being constructed and apart of the land in question also has another building, which is one that stands with the approval of the Panchayat, there is no reason to hold that the petitioner has to obtain the decision of the committee under the aforesaid Act to put the land to use for the purpose of constructing abuilding. For the aforesaid reasons, exts. P12 and P13 are unsustainable and are arbitrary. They are accordingly quashed. The respondents are directed to take up Exs. P10 and P11 and issue orders, granting building permit, if the applications are otherwise in order and without reference to the grounds stated in Ext. P12. If the decision on the application is not communicated to the petitioner within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the petitioner will be entitled to commence and complete the construction by virtue of the deeming provisions in the Act. The Writ Petition is allowed as above.