Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
EX-HAVILDAR ARUN B – Appellant
Versus
KAVALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT – Respondent
WP(C) 5486/2024
Building - Construction Permit - Building Act Section List - The court addressed the validity of a building permit, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with permit conditions and the option for regularization when permits expire or are violated.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was granted a building permit which expired without extension. After applying for a new permit, the Panchayat identified defects and opposed the application, citing unauthorized construction and transfer of property.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the building permit had expired and that the petitioner had made unauthorized constructions. It concluded that the petitioner must seek regularization for the additional constructions.
Issues: Whether the expired building permit can be extended or if the petitioner can seek regularization for unauthorized constructions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that an expired building permit cannot be extended and that the petitioner must apply for regularization of unauthorized constructions.
Final Decision: The writ petition is disposed of with directions for regularization application.
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 9th day of September, 2024 The petitioner along with his mother was granted Ext.P1 Building Permit on 02.03.2016 to put up a Commercial Building having an area of 145.60 Square Metres on the ground floor, 207.63 Square Metres on the first floor and 18.59 Square Metres as a stair room.
2. Admittedly, the Building Permit of the petitioner which expired after three years was not extended. The petitioner also submits that a portion of the property has been acquired, as seen from Ext.P2. He made an application for a fresh Building Permit on 09.12.2022, in which Ext.P3 order was passed by the 1st respondent-Panchayat on 17.12.2022, pointing out 11 defects.
3. Though the petitioner submits that his construction is in tune with the Building Permit granted, the same is opposed by the Panchayat. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent-Panchayat, in which it is submitted that Ext.P1 Building Permit expired on 01.03.2019 and he had applied for a partial completion plan. Eight door numbers were assigned to the completed portion. It is also stated that some portion of the building covered by the permit was transferred to his brother without getting permission from the Panchayat and that the transfer was done without intimation to the Panchayat, rendering the Building Permit invalid.
4. In view of the specific stand of the Panchayat, that additional constructions were made contrary to the terms of the permit, the only option available to the petitioner now is to seek a regularisation. If the petitioner applies for regularisation to the 1st respondent-Panchayat, the Panchayat shall take steps and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, if the application is found to be in order, without further delay.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
