SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 32435

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Murali Purushothaman, J
KUNHI MOHAMMED – Appellant
Versus
VYTHIRI GRAMA PANCHAYAT – Respondent
WP(C) 30859/2022



The court ruled that prior judgments permit reconsideration of building permits on land classified as exempted under Section 81 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, thereby invalidating the rejection of the petitioner's application.

Headnote:(A) Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 - Section 81 - Building permit - Application for construction of a new commercial building rejected on grounds of property being exempted plantation land - Court refers to prior judgments regarding construction on exempted land and finds the rejection unsustainable. (Paras 2, 4, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner owns land in Chundel village and sought a building permit after demolishing an existing commercial structure, which was denied based on the property’s classification under the Act.

Findings of Court:
The court found the rejection of the building permit unjustified and directed reconsideration of the application based on previous rulings.

Issues: The main issue was whether construction can be permitted on land classified as exempted under Section 81 of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that previous judgments allow for reconsideration of applications regarding exempted land, thus invalidating the prior rejection.

Result: Writ petition allowed with directions for reconsideration.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the owner of 11.95 Ares of land in Re.Sy No.108/24 of Chundel village of Vythiri Taluk of Wayanad District. According to him, there was a commercial building in the said property which has been assigned building numbers and assessed to property tax.

2. The petitioner proposed to construct a new commercial building after demolishing the old building. Accordingly, he made an application for building permit on 28.9.2021, which was rejected vide Ext.P10 order by the 2 nd respondent on the ground that the property is shown as exempted plantation land under Section 81 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act , 1963 (for short, 'the Act') in the Possession Certificate. The petitioner contends that his property does not form part of any exempted land under the Act.

3. Heard Sri. Abdul Jawad. K., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Manoj Ramaswamy, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

4. The petitioner purchased the land in question as per Ext.P1 sale deed on 7.9.2016. It is not disputed that there was a commercial building in the land which was assessed to property tax. He applied for building permit for construction of a new commercial building after demolishing the old building. The said application was rejected by Ext.P10 for the sole reason that the property falls under the exempted land under Section 81 of the Act. The question to be considered is whether the construction can be permitted in any land exempted under of the Act. The said question has been considered by this Court in Kinallur Rock Sand (M/s.) v. State of Kerala and others [2021 (2) KLT 351] wherein this Court directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner therein for grant of NOC for setting up an explossive magazine in the exempted land.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies on the judgment of this Court in W .P .(c) No. 34258/2022 dated 4.11.2022 in respect of the same Grama Panchayat, in which the question regarding the issuance of building permit with regard to the land exempted under Section 81 of the Act was considered and similar order of the respondents was set aside.

6. Going by the decision of this Court in Kinallur (supra) and the judgment of this Court in W .P .(c) No.34258/2022 referred to above, I am of the view that Ext.P10 order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the same is set aside. There will be a direction to the respondents to consider the application for building permit submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and in the light of the aforesaid decisions within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top