Chandran v. Onchiyam Grama Panchayath

## IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ## PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 11TH ASWINA, 1945 ## WP(C) NO. 34753 OF 2019 ## PETITIONER: CHANDRAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.GOVINDAN, KARAKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MADAPPALLY COLLEGE.P.O, VADAKARA TALUK BY ADV ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL ## RESPONDENTS: - 1 ONCHIYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANNOOKKARA.P.O., VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673102 - 2 THE SECRETARY, ONCHIYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KANNOOKKARA., P.O.VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE PIN-673102 BY ADVS. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS-R1 AND R2 SRI.K.K.ANILRAJ ## THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 2 ``` # BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- ## W.P.(C) No. 34753 of 2019 ---------------------------------------Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2023 ## JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges the order issued by the Tribunal for the Local Self Government Institutions refusing to interfere with the order of the Panchayat dated 06.03.2018 directing the petitioner to evict the unauthorised occupants of his building. 2. The petitioner is the owner of a building having 13 rooms 3 separate latrines and a bathroom allegedly constructed in the year 1989 and being rented out to labourers. On 20.10.2017, the petitioner was served with a notice issued by the Panchayat directing him to remove the occupants of the building which was maintained in unhygienic conditions. Subsequently, by Ext.P9 order dated 06.03.2018, the 2nd W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 3 ``` respondent found that the building was maintained in violation of Section 219K of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Rule 22F of Kerala Panchayat Buildings Rules, 2011 and directed to evict the residents failing which it was threatened that the building will be sealed. Challenging the aforesaid order, revision petition was filed before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions as R.P.No.19/2018. After considering the various circumstances, the Tribunal dismissed the revision petition, challenging which this Writ Petition has been preferred. 3. Petitioner pleaded that the building is maintained in hygienic conditions and the impugned orders are perverse. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Panchayat pointing out that thirteen commercial rooms have been let out by the petitioner to labourers and that there is no ventilation inside the building and further that it is maintained in very W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 4 ``` unhygienic conditions without any waste disposal facilities. It was also pleaded that the continued occupation and use of the building was a threat to the health and life of the labourers and also the people of the locality. It was further stated that petitioner had applied to change the building Nos.12/62 to 72 from the commercial category to a residential category without providing any facilities for residence. Based on the said application, the building in question was inspected and a report was submitted pointing out that there are no basic facilities even for the said buildings to be used as a residential one and therefore a notice was issued directing the petitioner to submit new plan and to make necessary alterations. The Panchayat further stated that the building in question is being used by the labourers and they are dumping waste which is a threat to the health of the locals and that despite notice, petitioner failed to carry out any of the requisite alterations W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 5 ``` and hence the Panchayat was left with no remedy other than to issue the impugned order. 5. I have heard the arguments of Sri.Zubail Pulikkool, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. U. K. Devidas, the learned Standing counsel for the respondent Panchayat. 6. The Panchayat as a local self government has a duty to abate nuisance and avert apprehended injuries to its locals and members of the public as well as to maintain hygiene in the locality. In the decision in Jose M.A v. Vadavukodu Puthencruz Gramapanchayat and others [2016 (4) KLJ 124], this Court has held that the Panchayat has a public duty to avert injuries to the residents of the locality and also to prevent the spread of epidemics which could ultimately lead to disaster and drastic consequences. 7. The Health Inspector of the Panchayat had carried out an inspection of the buildings of the petitioner and found the W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 6 ``` same to be unhygienic. The learned Tribunal has referred to the report of the said Health Inspector and came to the conclusion that the petitioner could not prove the contents of the said report as incorrect. The findings of fact entered into by the Panchayat as well as the Tribunal regarding the unhygienic manner and conditions in which the buildings of the petitioners are maintained cannot found to be perverse or inherently impossible, I am of the view that this Court sitting in jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot interfere with such orders. 8. The learned Tribunal has, after perusing the file produced by the Panchayat held that the petitioner could not prove or establish the contrary. The report of the Health Inspector specifically mentioned that the numerous labourers staying in unhygienic conditions are even disposing their waste in the neighbourhood and there is threat of epidemics. W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 7 ``` Petitioner has converted his building unauthorisedly into a lodge without providing even the basic requirements. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal and the order of the Panchayat in Ext.P9. Hence, there is no merit in this Writ petition and it is to be dismissed. 9. Notwithstanding the above, in case the petitioner is able to carry out necessary alterations and changes to the subject buildings in accordance with law and in a manner enabling maintenance of hygiene with sufficient waste disposal facilities, it will be open to him to approach the local authority after completion of such work to seek necessary permission in accordance with law. If in case any such application is submitted after carrying out necessary alterations, the Panchayat will be at liberty to consider the same in accordance with law. W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 8 ``` The writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. sd/- rps/ BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 9 ``` ## APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34753/2019 PETITIONER EXHIBITS - EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED ASSIGNMENT DEED DATED 29.03.1986 - EXHIBIT P2 THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE BUILDING, LATRINE AND WELL - EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DATED 23.2.2016 - EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DATED 13.03.2017 - EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 20.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT - EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 2.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT - EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 6.10.2017 BEFORE THE PANCHAYAT BOARD UNDER SECTION 276 OF THE KERALA PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT - EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.35714/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT - EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT BOARD - EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION IN RR.P.NO.19/2018 FILED BEFORE THE LSG, TRIVANDRUM - EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.P.NO.19/2018 DATED 20.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE LSG, TRIVADRUM - RESPONDENT EXHIBITS - EXHIBIT R1(A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.5.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT - EXHIBIT R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 10.5.2017 TO THE PETITIONER W.P.(C).No.34753 of 2019 ``` 10 ``` EXHIBIT R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.5.2017 COMMUNICATED TO PETITIONER WITH TYPED COPY EXHIBIT R1(D) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 12.10.2017 EXHIBIT R1(E) ABSTRACT OF ORDINARY MEETING OF RESPONDENT COUNCIL DATED 26.9.2017 EXHIBIT R1(F) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.10.2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT R1(G) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATEd 2.11.2017 EXHIBIT R1(h) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 6.3.2018