Abdul Rehim,J

The 6^th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant herein.

The 1^st respondent herein is the writ petitioner and respondents 2 to 6

are the respondents 1 to 5 in the writ petition.

2.

Challenge in the writ petition was against Exts.P2, P3, P8

and P9 proceedings. The 1^st respondent/writ petitioner was

constructing a residential building after obtaining a building permit

from the Grama Panchayath. Ext.P2 is a notice issued by the 2^nd

respondent directing the 5^th respondent to take steps for stoppage of

construction of the septic tank of the said building by the writ

petitioner. It is stated that, the direction was issued based on a

compliant lodged by the appellant herein and based on a report

obtained from the Deputy District Medical Officer, Malappuram, that

the septic tank is being constructed without keeping the distance of

15 Meters from the nearest drinking water source, as stipulated under

the Public Health Act and that there are chances of polluting the

drinking water source. Ext.P3 is the consequential stop memo issued

by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath requesting the writ

petitioner to stop the construction of the septic tank. Ext.P8 is the

copy of a reply letter issued by the 3^rd respondent Deputy Director of

Panchayaths to the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath, wherein it is

mentioned that, the 'stop memo' issued to the writ petitioner cannot

be withdrawn taking into consideration of the possibility of causing

pollution to the drinking water source. In the said letter it is stated

that, even though the distance to be maintained as per the Kerala

Panchayath Building Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

Building Rules') is only 7.5 meters, there is a report and instructions of

the District Collector. Therefore it is stated that the writ petitioner may

be directed to shift the location of the septic tank to a distance of 15

Meters from the drinking water source. Ext.P9 is a letter issued by

the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath to the writ petitioner

requesting compliance of the directions contained in Ext.P8.

3.

While considering the writ petition, the learned Single Judge

observed that, the District Medical Officer had suggested shifting of

the septic tank on the basis of provisions contained in the Madras

Public Health Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Public Health

Act'). But it was noticed in the judgment that, as per Rule 85 of the

Building Rules the distance to be maintained is only 7.5 meters. The

learned Single Judge found that, in fact there is a distance of 8.5

Meters kept from the well of the appellant to the septic tank under

construction. It is also found that the septic tank is being constructed

strictly in accordance with the stipulations contained in the building

permit. Therefore it was found that there is no basis for issuing Ext.P3

stop memo. The Single Judge noticed that, by virtue of an interim

order passed in the writ petition permitting the construction, the septic

tank was fully constructed and the Grama Panchayath had issued

'Occupancy Certificate' to the building in question. Hence the writ

petition was allowed by quashing Exts.P2, P3, P8 and P9 proceedings.

It is aggrieved by the said judgment, the above writ appeal is filed.

4.

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that,

provisions contained in Section 32 of the Public Health Act need to be

strictly adhered, because the said Act is still in force in the locality

(area) in question. Further it is contended that, the Public Health Act

has got an overriding effect on other laws by virtue of Section 144 of

the said Act. Therefore it is contended that, even though the Building

Rules stipulates only a distance of 7.5 Meters, it is to be ensured that

the septic tank is keeping a distance of 15 Meters from the nearest

drinking water source. The above said aspect was omitted

consideration of the learned Single Judge, is the contention.

5.

Lea