IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN THURSDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WP(C) NO.31599 OF 2019 PETITIONER :-

SALVIN POULOSE, S/O.POULOSE, CHETTITHODAN HOUSE, ANNANAD P.O., KADUKUTTY, PIN - 680 309, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.

WILSON URMESE SMT.MARIA ELIZABETH WILSON RESPONDENTS :-

1 PARAPPUKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, NANDHIKKARA, PIN - 680 310, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, AYYANTHOLE P.O., PIN - 680 003, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADV SMT.M.R.REENA, SC, PARAPPUKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THRISSUR BY SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10 ^th day of March, 2022 This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

“(i) Call for the records leading to the case.

(ii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing Exts.P4, P6 & P6(a).

ii(a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing Ext.P8.

(iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to take immediate action on the application and also Ext.P7 representation submitted by the petitioner for numbering the building, which has been constructed as per Ext.P1 building permit, and number it for commercial use, at the earliest.

(iv) Issue a declaration that the petitioner's building, which is constructed in three cents of land, will come under the provisions for construction in small plots and that the rule applicable for set back is under Rule 64 Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Panchayat.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had been granted Ext.P1 building permit and had constructed a building in his property on the basis of the same. However, it is submitted that the 1^st respondent is refusing to number the building and has pointed out several defects in the completion plan. Finally, it is submitted that the contention now raised is with regard to the shortage of set back from the National Highway in one corner of the petitioner's building where the set back is only 2.4 metres from the National Highway. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is only a corner of the building and that the petitioner may be permitted to occupy the building which has already been completed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there has been no violation or deviation from the building permit.

4. The 1^st respondent has placed a detailed counter affidavit on record. It is submitted that the petitioner had obtained the building permit showing a distance of 3.20 metres from the corner of the building to the boundary of his property. It is submitted that after construction, it is found that the distance from the front corner of the building to the road is only 2.40 metres. It is submitted that the road in front of the petitioner's property is a National Highway and that the petitioner's building is constructed at a distance of only 2.40 metres from the service road abutting the National Highway. It is, therefore, contended that the Panchayat is unable to take any further steps in the matter without rectification of the said defect.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a decision of this Court in W.P.(C) No.34617/2018. Relying on and construing the provisions of Rule 28(1) of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, this Court had held that since the construction is completed and since the petitioner has a case that the building was constructed in accordance with the permit and approved plan, a leniency is to be shown to the petitioner.

6. However, in the instant case, it is the specific case of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Panchayat that Ext.P1 building permit shows a distance of 3.20 metres from the edge of