IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
BINDHU V M – Appellant
Versus
PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 4681 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for occupancy certificate. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. writ petition dismissed with conditions for rectifying defects. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
i) “To issue a writ or order or direction declaring that the petitioner’s application under Ext. P5, P6 & P7 has been deemed to be allowed for the period required in the application as the same has not been considered within 15 days of the submission of the applications.
ii) to issue Mandamus or order or direction to the 2nd respondent to issue a certificate to the petitioner specifying that the applications under Ext. P5, P6 & P7 has been deemed to be allowed for the period required in the application.
iii) to issue a Writ of certiorari quashing Ext. P8 issued by the 3rd respondent as it is violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India ;
iv) to issue such other appropriate Writ, Order or direction as is deemed just and necessary in the circumstances of the case.” [sic]
2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue an occupancy certificate to the petitioner for the building constructed. A statement is filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of the statement.
5. “It is submitted that, the permit was extended for three years on two occasions and finally when the validity was due to expire on 09.07.2024, an application for occupancy was submitted on 06.07.2024, undertaking that the construction had been completed.
6. On the basis of the same, the Overseer attached to the Municipality had conducted an inspection and had found that, the construction is made not in accordance with the approved plan and permit. Instead of constructing a sceptic tank, the petitioner had constructed a Leach pit. As per the provisions of the Building Rules, for any building constructed which is having a plinth area of more than 100 Sq.Meter, it is mandatory to construct a sceptic tank and soak pit.
7. On the basis of the report of the Overseer, on 06.11.2024, the petitioner was directed to rectify the defect. Thereafter, on 22.12.2024, a further inspection was conducted from the office and it was found that, sceptic tank had not been constructed and the defect was subsisting.
8. Even though, the petitioner was directed to effect construction of the sceptic tank and intimate the same before the Municipality, they did not do so. Hence the petitioner is not entitled for any occupancy certificate.”
3. From the above, it is clear that the application is not considered because there is no septic tank and instead of constructing a septic tank, the petitioner constructed a leach pit, which is not enough as per the Kerala Building Rules. In the light of the above statement, I think this writ petition need not be retained here. The petitioner can cure the defect mentioned in paragraph Nos 5 to 8 of the statement. If the defect is cured and the application is filed, the Panchayat will forthwith issue the occupancy certificate.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.