Back
2025 Supreme(Ker) 2865
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
The Chottanikkara Grama Panchayath – Appellant
Versus
Chief Secretary to the Government of Kerala – Respondent
WP (C) No. 15678 of 2025
Decided On : 09-09-2025
For the Appellants : Veena Hari, Keerthy Johnson, Mintu Jose, Gini George, Aishwarya Shivakumar, Nirmal S.
For the Respondents: P.A. Ayub Khan, Dheeraj A.S.
Local government and state agencies must ensure the safety and rehabilitation of residents affected by structural deficiencies in housing projects initiated at their directive.
Headnote:(A) Disaster Management Act, 2005 - Section 22(2)(m) - Writ petition for rehabilitation scheme for residents of Saphalyam flat complex due to structural defects - The petitioner acquired land for housing economically backward families following a government initiative. Severe structural defects were reported, leading to potential endangerment of residents' lives. Government responsibility to act on housing problems emphasized. The court directed a multi-agency meeting to frame a rehabilitation scheme expeditiously. (Paras 2-19)
(B) Local Government Responsibility - The local government bears the duty to ensure the safety and rehabilitation of residents affected by poor construction, reflecting the necessity for cooperation between state agencies and local authorities. (Paras 10, 18)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for rehabilitation scheme due to unsafe housing. (Para 3 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. state agencies clarify limits of sdrf responsibilities. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. counsel representation heard for all parties. (Para 12) |
| 4. disclosure of severe structural defects necessitating urgent action. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
N. NAGARESH, J.
1. The Chottanikkara Grama Panchayat is the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed for framing a Scheme to rehabilitate the residents of Saphalyam flat complex in Chottanikkara Panchayat.
2. The petitioner states that the 5th respondent-Kerala State Housing Board issued Ext.P1 letter dated 29.10.2011 informing the petitioner that the Ministry of Revenue and Housing has directed to submit proposals for constructing houses for economically backward houseless people. The petitioner was required to confirm availability of suitable land and the number of beneficiaries within its local limit. On 26.06.2012, the petitioner was required to furnish necessary details if interested in the project.
3. The petitioner-Panchayat acquired 33.9 Ares of land in Survey No.324/2 of Kanayannur Village for the purpose of constructing flats for 54 landless poor families in the Panchayat. The 5th respondent was informed accordingly. Requisite documents including a sketch and copy of sale deed was submitted.
4. By Ext.P3 letter dated 01.01.2014, the 5th respondent required the petitioner to handover ₹54 lakhs for the project along with ₹27 lakhs, which is the contribution to be collected from the selected beneficiaries and interested organisations. Ext.P4 agreement was executed by the petitioner with the 5th respondent for implementation of the housing project, on 11.03.2014. Ext.P5 Building Permit was issued on 11.06.2014.
5. The 5th respondent constructed 24 flats.The keys were handed over to the beneficiaries on 27.07.2016. Possession were handed over to the allottees and licence deeds were also executed. However, due to serious faults in construction of the building, cracks developed and became visible in the building. Concerned by the deteriorating condition of the flats, the petitioner informed the Assistant Engineer highlighting the pathetic condition of the building. They were required to conduct an inspection and submit report.
6. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Local Infrastructure Development and Engineering Wing issued letter dated 21.09.2023 informing the Panchayat that the building is in a dangerous condition. The Panchayat was directed to conduct a structural stability test engaging a Government agency or Structural Engineers from Government Engineering College. Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau directed the petitioner to ensure safety of the inhabitants.
7. The report given by the Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government Engineering College disclosed severe structural defects and hazards in respect of the building. The sunshades of the building were heavily damaged. Dampness and water stains inside the flat were severe. There were cracks in the roof slabs. Ext.P9 report concluded that it is practically impossible to restore the existing building to its original condition. The report also cautioned that the lives of the inhabitants are in danger.
8. By Ext.P10, the petitioner required the 5th respondent-KSHB to take immediate necessary action to ensure safety of the inhabitants. Representations were submitted to various other authorities. There was no positive response. In the circumstances, on 06.02.2025, the Panchayat Committee decided to get the flats vacated, temporarily shifting the inhabitants to rented premises. Considering the poor financial background of the families, the Panchayat decided to meet rental expenses on humanitarian grounds. The Panchayat is meeting monthly rent at the rate of ₹5,000/- for the 24 families which were temporarily shifted.
9. The Panchayat prays to direct the respondents to ensure that the residents are housed in a reas
