2019 Supreme(Ker) 560
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.
Solaman Varghese S/o Varghese Thomas – Petitioner
Versus
The District Geologist, Department of Mining and Geology – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 17106 of 2019
Decided On : 05-08-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Sri. R. Sunil Kumar, Smt. A. Salini Lal, Sri. Arun Krishna.
For the Respondents: Sri. Rasheed C. Nooranad, Smt. M.N. Anitha, Sri. Harish K.P.
IMPORTANT POINTS
Under the Constitution a mandamus can be issued by the Court when the applicant establishes that he has a legal right to performance of legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought and said right was subsisting on the date of the petition. The duty that may be enjoined by mandamus may be one imposed by the Constitution or a Statute or by Rules or orders having the force of law. But no mandamus can be issued to direct the Government to refrain from enforcing the provisions of law or to do something which is contrary to law.
Headnote:
Constitution of India- Article 226; The Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules- Rule 14 (3) application is not supported by the mandatory documents, as per the provisos to sub-rule (2) of Rule 14, and also an affidavit as per the mandate of sub-rule (3) of Rule 14. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that there is any failure on the part of the 1st respondent in discharging his statutory obligations, so as to enable the petitioner to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus for consideration of Ext.P3 application.
Statement of facts:
The petitioner, who is stated to be the owner of 4.70 ares of property in Re-survey No. 205/2-2 and 205/21 of Thazhakkara village in Alappuzha district has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to issue him development permit, in order to develop that property for the construction of a residential building having plinth area of 186.49 sq. mts. on the strength of Ext.P1 building permit. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 application for development permit.
Finding of the court:
The petitioner cannot seek a writ of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P2 application for development permit, which is not supported by a development plan signed by an 'Engineer-A' Licensee as per the statutory mandate, as no mandamus can be issued to do something which is contrary to law.
Result: Dismissed
JUDGMENT :
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.
1. The petitioner, who is stated to be the owner of 4.70 ares of property in Re-survey No. 205/2-2 and 205/21 of Thazhakkara village in Alappuzha district has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to issue him development permit, in order to develop that property for the construction of a residential building having plinth area of 186.49 sq. mts. on the strength of Ext.P1 building permit. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 application for development permit.
2. On 24.06.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for the first respondent. Urgent notice on admission by speed post was ordered to respondents 2 and 3, returnable within two weeks.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent and also the learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3.
4. The issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to seek a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to consider Ext.P2 application for development permit.
5. For construction of a residential building, on the property in question, the petitioner submitted an application for building permit. Based on that application the 2nd respondent, who is the Secretary of the 3rd respondent Grama Panchayat granted Ext.P1 building permit dated 06.03.2019 for constructing a residential building having a plinth area of 186.49 sq. mts. In order to develop that land for the purpose of construction, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application for development permit. Along with Ext.P2, the petitioner produced Ext.P3 development plan, which is one prepared and signed by a Supervisor - B Licensee. The grievance of the petitioner is that, though Ext.P2 application along with Ext.P3 development plan was submitted on 14.05.2019, he is yet to be issued with a development permit.
6. Chapter XXIII of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 deals with registration of Architects, Building Designers, Engineers, Town Planners, Supervisors, etc. As per Rule 139, whenever it is required under the Rules that a plan or drawing or specification shall be one prepared and signed by or a certificate shall be one so certified and signed by an Architect, Building Designer, Engineer, Town Planner or Supervisor such Architect, Building Designer, Engineer, Town Planner or Supervisor shall be a person registered or deemed to have been registered under the provisions of Chapter XXIII. As per Rule 140, the Director of Urban Affairs shall be the Registering Authority for the State and the registration is valid for practice in any Panchayat in the State of Kerala. Rule 141 deals with application and procedure for registration. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 141, any person having the requisite qualification may submit an application in the form in Appendix-K. Rule 142, which deals with qualification for registration, provides that no person shall be eligible for registration in the category in Column (1) unless he possesses the qualification as in Column (2) of Appendix-L.
7. Rule 144 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules deals with responsibilities and functions of registered Architects, etc. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 144, plans and drawings shall be prepared strictly in conformity with the provisions contained in the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and the rules and any direction issued by the Government or Panchayat and a certificate to that effect shall be recorded and signed in the plans and drawings. As per sub-rule (2), a certificate of verification of site shall be recorded and signed in the site plan. As per sub-rule (3), plans and drawings shall be prepared only after inspecting the site and getting convinced of the boundaries. As per sub-rule (