Dr. Satheesan and Sudha Satheesan v. The State of Kerala represented by the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others (W.P.(C).No.15185/2020 & 34533/2019)

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** # **MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1942** # **WP(C).No.15185 OF 2020(W)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** - **1 DR.SATHEESAN, AGED 61 YEARS S/O. KELU VAIDYAR,CHAKKANALI HOUSE, GOVT. HOSPITAL ROAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD P.O, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, 680 506** - **2 SUDHA SATHEESAN, AGED 53 YEARS W/O. DR. SATHEESAN, CHAKKANALI HOUSE, GOVT. HOSPITAL ROAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD P.O, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680 506** **BY ADVS. SRI.ARUN ASHOK SMT.NEENA JAMES** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANNATHAPURAM PIN 695 001.** - **2 THE REVNEUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680 003** - **3 TAHSILDAR, CHAVAKKAD TALUK OFFICE, VANJIKADAVU RD, CHAVAKKAD, KERALA 680 506** - **4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 516** - **5 AGRICULTURAL FIELD OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHAVAKKAD P.O, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 506** - **6 THE DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE (KSREC), VIKAS BHAVAN, C-BLOCK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 033** ::2:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** - **7 THE CONVENER, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHAVAKKAD P.O, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 506** - **8 CHAVAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, REPREENTED BY SECRETARY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 506** **R8 BY ADV. SMT.GIRIJA K GOPAL** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.08.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).34533/2019(N), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ::3:: **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.34533 OF 2019(N)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **SUDHA SATHEESAN AGED 53 YEARS W/O.SATHEESAN, CHAKKANALI HOUSE, GOVT. HOSPITAL ROAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD.P.O, THRISSUR, PIN-680506** **BY ADVS. SRI.ARUN ASHOK SMT.NEENA JAMES** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** ## **CHAVAKKAD MUNICIPALITY** **REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR, PIN680506** **R1 BY SMT.GIRIJA K.GOPAL, SC, CHAVAKKAD MUNICIPALITY** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.08.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).15185/2020(W), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ::4:: **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** ## **--------------------------------W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019 ----------------------------------** Dated this the 10[th] day of August, 2020 ## **J U D G M E N T** In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondentChavakkad Municipaliy both these cases are disposed of on the basis of this common judgment. ## 2. The case set up in W.P(C).No.15185/2020 is as follows: _The petitioners herein are in the exclusive possession and ownership of 14.5 Cents of landed properties situated in Survey No. 195/4 and 195/5 of Manathala Village of Chavakkad Taluk. The said properties are pakka dry land even before the enactment of the Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008. More over, 50 year old buildings were already existed in the properties at the time of purchasing the same by the petitioners in the year 2007,2008 and 2009. Those can be evidenced from the title documents of the properties, and the satellite images. After purchasing the properties the petitioners obtained building permit from the 8[th] respondent and thus constructed a multi storied building there. The ground floor is consisted of shop rooms and other levels are consisted of residential apartments. In the ground floor, the 2[nd] petitioner is conducting a clinical medical laboratory and medical store under the name and style “Mahalakshmi Medilines Clinical Laboratory” and “Mahalakshmi Medilines Medical Shop”. The first petitioner being a doctor rendering his consultation service in one of the rooms. The said properties in question are at present shown as residential plot (purayidam) in the records of Kerala_ ::5:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** _Government Registration Department as evidenced by Ext. P6 and P7. Even though the said properties are pakka garden land, it is mistakenly included in the data bank and shown as “Nancha” in the Basic Tax Register. Immediately after knowing that petitioners submitted Ext.P8 application before the 5[th] respondent to correct the same in the year 2017 itself. But no action has been taken so far. Even though the petitioners simultaneously approached the office of the RDO to submit an application for correcting the entry in BTR, the same was not even accepted stating that an order is required to be obtained from the LLMC first. Facts being so when the petitioners filed an application to make additional construction of the building in the property in question, the same was rejected by the 8[th] respondent stating that the property is shown as wetland in the possession certificate. On an another occasion when the 8[th] respondent did not consider the application for the renewal of licence and registration certificate of laboratory and medical store, stating that the property is shown as wetland in BTR, the 2[nd] petitioner was constrained to file W.P(C).No.34533/2019 before this Hon’ble Court for the renewal and the same is pending. This is a clear case in which directions are required to be issued to treat the properties as garden land by declaring so and to have the proceedings permitting the petitioners to make the additional construction in the building and licence and registration certificate for the laboratory and medical store are to be renewed. Therefore Ext. P8 application seeking the removal of the property from the data bank and then correct the same accordingly in the revenue records required to be entertained by the 5[th] and 2[nd] respondents within a stipulated time as fixed by this Court. Directions are also required against the other respondents in this regard. And also challenging the Ext.P9 order of the 8[th] respondent Municipality._ It is in the light of these factual averments and contentions that the petitioner has filed W.P.(C).No.15185/2020 seeking the following reliefs: ::6:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** - _“i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 5th respondent, to consider the Ext. P8 application positively within a short span of time as fixed by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice._ - _ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the Respondent No. 2 to correct the entry in revenue records based on the decision taken by the 5th respondent within a time frame as fixed by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice._ - _iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the Respondent No. 4, 6 and 7 to provide the necessary data or reports necessary for the speedy disposal of Ext.P8 application and for the correction in the revenue records within a stipulate time limits._ - _iv) To declare that the nature of the property in question is a garden land by this Hon’ble Court._ - _v) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 8th respondent municipality to issue permit for additional construction or change of occupancy in the existing building situating in the petitioner’s property after setting aside the Ext. P9._ - _vi) To pass any such other or further orders as the petitioner may seek and this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant._ 3. The case set up in W.P.(C).No.34533/2019 is as follows: _The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the non consideration of application for renewal of registration certificate of her clinical laboratory and renewal of licence of medical shop attached with the laboratory. The petitioner is conducting a clinical laboratory and medical shop under the name and style “Mahalakshmi Medilines Clinical Laboratory” and “Mahalakshmi Medilines Medical Shop” in a building belongs to her and her husband which is situated within the limits of respondent municipality. The respondent municipality earlier granted Ext. P1 registration certificate dated 23-06-2009 for conducting private paramedical institution and Ext. P3 licence for conducting medical shop in the same building. The said registration certificate and licence were timely renewed up to 31-03-2017 without any objection from the respondent municipality. Before the expiry of Exts. P1 & P3, petitioner submitted applications for renewal of Ext. P1 registration certificate and Ext. P3 medical shop licence but the same was not even accepted by the officials of respondent municipality stating that the property in which the building situate is shown as ‘Nancha property’ in the possession certificate. The said property is a pakka dry land even before the enactment of Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008. More over there was already an existing building at the time of purchasing the_ ::7:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** _property by the petitioner and her husband. That can be evidenced from the title documents of the property. Petitioner and her husband had already taken necessary steps to remove the property from the data bank and to change the nature of the property in the year 2017 itself and the same is pending. Petitioner has every reasons to believe that the property will be removed from the data bank and accordingly changes will be effected in the BTR. But if the registration certificate and shop licence are not renewed petitioner will be put to great hardship and peril since the income derived from the above establishments are the only livelihood of her. Even though respondent officials orally informed that petitioner’s grievance will be taken on file and will be redressed as soon as possible no action was taken so far irrespective of the numerous written communications were sent by the petitioner in this regard. Hence in such circumstances petitioner is entitled to get the registration certificate of clinical laboratory and medical shop licence renewed at least provisionally till the property is removed from the data bank and nature of land is changed in the BTR. In fact the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of dictum laid down in_ _**2017(1) KLT 168** . Even though the dictum is laid upon the provisions of Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008 in granting permit for construction of additional rooms in an existing building, the same principle is applicable in the case on hand also. Hence the description of the land in possession certificate is not very relevant in renewing the registration certificate and shop licence which are already granted by the municipality. The respondents is not even accepting the renewal applications as mentioned above seeking appropriate directions against the respondent municipality to accept and renew the registration certificate of clinical laboratory and medical shop licence._ ## It is in the light of the abovesaid factual averments that the petitioner has ## filed W.P.(C).No.34533/2019 seeking the following reliefs: > _i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent to renew the registration certificate of petitioner’s clinical laboratory and medical shop licence, at least provisionally till the property is removed from the data bank and nature of land is changed in the BTR, in the interest of justice,_ _**AND**_ _ii) To pass any such or further orders as the petitioner may seek and this Hon’ble_ ::8:: **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** _Court deem fit to grant._ 4. Heard Sri.Arun Ashok Iyyani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(C). No.15185/2020, who is also the counsel for the sole petitioner in the latter W.P.(C).No.34533/2019, Sri.K.J.Manu Raj, learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents 1 to 7 in W.P.(C).No.15185/2020 and Smt.Girija Gopal, learned Standing Counsel for Chavakkad Municipality, appearing for the 8[th] respondent in W.P.(C). No.15185/2020, who is the sole respondent in W.P.(C).No.34533/2020. 5. The case of the petitioner is that the subject property though continues to be described as ' _nilam/paddy land_ ' (nancha) in the BTR, the same has been converted as garden land/purayidam long prior to 12.8.2008 (date of coming into force of the Kerala Conservation of Land and Wet Land Act, 2008). Further that the subject property has been wrongly included in the land data bank prepared as per the provisions of the 2008 Act as ' _nilam/paddy land_ '. Further that, the petitioner has already made constructions in the subject property on the basis of Ext.P-4 building permit dated 10.5.2007 issued by the respondent-Chavakkad Municipality and Ext.P-5 building permit dated 25.5.2013 issued by the respondentMunicipality that the petitioner has filed Ext.P-8 application dated 25.8.2017 before the 7[th] respondent-LLMC seeking for orders for exclusion of the property from the land data bank. One of the grievances of the petitioner is regarding the delay in consideration and disposal of Ext.P-8 ::9:: **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** application submitted as early as on 25.8.2017 which was pending before the 7[th] respondent-LLMC. Yet another complaint is that the 2[nd] petitioner has been running a medical shop (pharmaceutical shop) as well as a clinical laboratory in 2 of the shop buildings which has been constructed on the strength of Ext.P-4 building permit. In that regard, it is stated that though trade licenses to run the said pharmaceutical shop and clinical laboratory were earlier granted by the Secretary of the Municipality from time to time, the same were later declined on the ground that the subject property wherein the shop buildings has been constructed is a ' _paddy land/nilam_ '. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing W.P.(C).No.34533/2019 in which this Court has passed interim order dated 8.1.2020 directing that the respondent-Municipality may issue provisional licenses to the petitioner until consideration of the abovesaid application by the statutory LLMC for exclusion of the subject property from the land data bank. Yet another grievance of the petitioner is to the effect that the petitioners sought for change of occupancy of the said property covered by Ext.P-4 which was declined by the Secretary of the Municipality as per Ext.P-9 dated 16.5.2019 mainly citing objection that the subject property whereby the building has been constructed is shown as _'nilam/nanja'_ and hence the said request cannot be considered. It appears that the respondent-Chavakkad Municipality would submit that after Ext.P-9 there are subsequent developments, that the petitioner approached ::10:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** the Municipality that he would continue to use the ground floor for commercial purposes and 1[st] and 2[nd] floors for residential purposes as initially permitted by Ext.P-4 building permit, etc. The learned counsel for the petitioners would point out that he does not have factual instructions on those aspects and both the petitioner and the respondent-Municiapality were unaware of the Government Circular dated 13.8.2018 regarding the waiver of objections based on the nature of the land where the building permit has been granted by the local bodies before the cut off date of 30.12.2017 (date of coming into force of the amended provisions of the 2008 Act, which has been introduced as per Sec.27A thereof), the petitioners may not be deprived the benefit of the said Circular, more so, even the respondent Municipality have not considered those aspects. 6. After hearing both sides it is seen that the competent authority of the State Government in the Local Self Government Department has issued Government Circular bearing No.LSGD-406/RA/2018-LSGD dated 13.8.2018 ordering that where building permits have been granted by the local body concerned in converted lands which has not been included in the land data bank as 'nilam/paddy land' then the local bodies concerned can proceed further with the grant of completion certificate, occupancy certificate, building numbering, door numbering, etc., in accordance with the provisions contained in the Building Rules notwithstanding the fact the ::11:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** subject property continues to be described in the BTR as _'nilam/paddy land'_ . The said Government Circular dated 13.8.2018 reads as follows: ## " കകരള സർകകർ േ ്കാ നന. തസസ്വഭവ - 406/ആർ. എ 1/2018-തസസ്വഭവ തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയനഭരണ ( ആർ.എ) വകുപപ തതിരുവനന്തപുരന, തതീയ്യതതി: 13/08/2018 പരതപതന ി വതിഷയന: തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയനഭരണ വകുപപ - 2018 ലലെ ലനൽവയൽ തണതീർത്തട സനരക്ഷണ(കഭദഗതതി) ആകതിലന്റെ പക്കാബലെല്യ തതീയ്യതതിക്കു മുമപ ലപർമതിറപ നൽകേതിയ നതിർമതിതതികേളതിൽ ഒക്കുലപൻസതി / ലകേടതിട നമർ നൽകുന്നതതിനപ നതിർകദ്ദേശങ്ങൾ പുറലപടുവതിക്കുന്നതപ-സനബനതിചപ. സൂചന: ബഹ. തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയനഭരണ വകുപപ മനതിയുലട 06/08/2018 ലലെ 604/18/ MLSGD നനമർ കുറതിപപ. 2018 ലലെ കകേരള ലനൽവയൽ തണതിർത്തട സനരക്ഷണ (കഭദഗതതി) ആകപ 30/12/2017 തതീയ്യതതി പക്കാബലെല്യത് **ത** ൽ വന്നതിട്ടുള്ളതക്കാണപ. പസ് **ത** ു ആകതിലലെ വകുപപ 27 ( എ ) ലെക്കാണപ വതിജക്കാപനന ലചയ്യലപടക്കാത്ത ഭൂമതിയതിലലെ നതിർമക്കാണക്കാനുമതതിലയ കുറതിചപ പതതിപക്കാദതിക്കുന്നതപ. എന്നക്കാൽ 30/12/2017 നപ മുമപ തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയനഭരണ സക്കാപനങ്ങളതിൽ നതിന്നപ ആകതിലന്റെ പക്കാബലെല്യതതിയ്യതതികപ മുൻപപ നതിർമക്കാണക്കാനുമതതി നൽകേതിയതിട്ടുള്ളതന എന്നക്കാൽ ടതി ആകപ നതിലെവതിൽ വന്നതതിനു കശഷന നതിർമക്കാണന പൂർത് **ത** യക് **ക** ാ തിയതിട്ടുള്ളതമക്കായ ലകേടതിടങ്ങൾകപ ഒക്കുലപൻസതി / ലകേടതിട നമർ ലെഭതിക്കുന്നതതിനക്കായതി ബനലപട തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയനഭരണ സക്കാപനങ്ങലള സമതീപതിക് **ക** ുമക്കാൾ ആകതിലലെ വല്യവസകേൾ പകേക്കാരന ബനലപട റവനന്യൂ ഡതിവതിഷണൽ ഓഫതീസറുലട അനുമതതി / സമതപതo നതിഷ്കർഷതിച്ചു ലകേക്കാണപ അകപക്ഷകേൾ നതിരസതിക്കുന്നതക്കായതി സർകക്കാറതിലന്റെ ശ്രദ്ധയതിൽലപടതിട്ടുണപ. സർകക്കാർ ഇകക്കാരല്യന വതിശദമക്കായതി പരതികശക്കാധതിച്ചു. 2018 ലലെ കകേരള ലനൽവയൽ തണതീർത്തട സനരക്ഷണ (കഭദഗതതി) ആകപ നതിലെവതിൽ വരുന്നതതിനപ മുമപ അനുവദതിചതിട്ടുള്ള നതിർമക്കാണ ലപർമതിറപ പകേക്കാരന പൂർത് **ത** കേരതിചതിട്ടുള്ള ലകേടതിടങ്ങൾകപ ഒക്കുലപൻസതി/ലകേടതിട നമർ അനുവദതിക്കുന്നതതിനക്കായതി 30/12/2017 തതീയ്യതതികപ കശഷന നതിലെവതിൽ വന്ന ആകതിലലെ വകുപ്പുകേൾ പകേക്കാരമുള്ള കരഖകേൾ നതിഷ്കർഷതിക്കുന്നതപ ശരതിയക്കായ നടപടതിയലല്ലെന്നപ കേക്കാണുന. അതതിനക്കാൽ 30/12/2017 നപ മുമപ അന്നപ നതിലെവതിലെതിരുന്ന ചടങ്ങളന വല്യവസകേളന പക്കാലെതിചപ അത പകേക്കാരന സമർപതിചതിട്ടുള്ള അകപക്ഷകേളതിൽ ബനലപട തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയനഭരണ സക്കാപനന എല്ലെക്കാ വതിധ പരതികശക്കാധനകേളന നടത് **ത** ചടവതികധയമക്കാലണന്നപ ഉറപ്പു വരുത് **ത** യതതിനു കശഷന അനുവദതിചതിട്ടുള്ള നതിർമക്കാണ പർമതിറപ പകേക്കാരന പൂർത് **ത** കേരതിച ലകേടതിടങ്ങൾകപ ഒക്കു ലപൻസതി / ലകേടതിട നമറതിനക്കായതി സമർപതിക്കുന്ന അകപക്ഷകേളതിൽ 2018 ലലെ കകേരള ലനൽവയൽ തണതീർത്തട സനരക്ഷണ (കഭദഗതതി) ആകതിലലെ (2018 ലലെ 29) വല്യവസകേൾ ബക്കാധകേമലല്ലെനന പസ് **ത** ു ലകേടതിട നതിർമക്കാണ ലപർമതിറപ നൽകുകമക്കാൾ നതിലെവതിലുണക്കായതിരുന്ന നതിയമങ്ങൾ ആണപ ടതി ലകേടതിടങ്ങൾകപ ഒക്കുലപൻസതി / ലകേടതിട നമർ നൽക്കുന്ന അവസരത് **ത** ൽ ബക്കാധകേലമനന ഇതതിനക്കാൽ അറതിയതിക്കുന. റതി.ലകേ.കജക്കാസപ അഡതിഷണൽ ചതീഫപ ലസക്രടറതി" ::12:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** 7. After hearing both sides, it is seen that both the petitioner and respondent-Municipal authorities have not adverted to the applicability of the abovesaid Government Circular. This Court need not get into other aspects of the matter inasmuch as it is for the respondent-Municipality to ascertain as to whether the subject building involved in the impugned proceedings have been constructed on the basis of building permits issued prior to 30.12.2017 and that too possibly after the petitioner secured orders from the respondent-LLMC regarding exclusion of subject property from the land data bank. Accordingly, the following orders and directions are issued: _(1) The 7[th] respondent in W.P(C).No.15185/2020 (LLMC concerned) will immediately take up the matters in Ext.P-8 application dated 25.8.2017 and will ensure that the petitioner is given permission to pay the requisite fee to secure satellite pictures and expert opinion of the respondent -Kerala State Remote Sensing & Environment Centre, in respect of the subject property concerned and thereafter the respondent-agriculture officer, who is the convener of the LLMC will ensure that formal letter of requisition is sent to the respondent-KSREC for securing satellite pictures and expert opinion of the said body regarding the subject property covered by the abovesaid Ext.P-8 application. Formalities should be duly completed by the respondent-LLMC/convener within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment._ ::13:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** - _(2) Thereafter, the respondent-KSREC will ensure that satellite pictures and expert opinion of the subject property are furnished without much delay, regarding the nature and lie of the subject property as covered by Ext.P-8 application and also as to the ground realities and as to whether the subject property was cultivable or suitable for cultivation as on 12.8.2008 and whether the property would broadly fulfil the definition of 'paddy land' as per Sec.2(xii) of the 2008 Act and the satellite pictures and expert opinion shall be furnished by the respondent-KSREC to the respondentLLMC through its convener within 2 months from the date of request as abovesaid._ - _(3) Without waiting for satellite pictures, the respondent-LLMC will ensure that effective inspection of the subject property with due notice to the petitioner to ascertain the ground realities of the subject property as on 12.8.2008 and as to the factual parameters hereinabove with due prior notice to the petitioner and a copy of the inspection report should be given to the petitioner in advance. This process should be duly completed by the respondent-LLMC within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. After receipt of the satellite pictures and expert opinion of the respondent-KSREC, copies thereof should be given to the petitioner in advance and thereafter the respondentLLMC will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and should take a decision so as to pass orders on the request of the petitioner for excluding the subject property from the land data bank, without much delay, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the satellite pictures and expert_ ::14:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** _opinion from the respondent-KSREC and after duly considering the contents of the inspection report and contents of the expert opinion and satellite pictures, etc. Copies of the proceedings so issued by the LLMC should be duly furnished to the petitioner as well as to the Secretary of the Municipality and to the RDO concerned. Thereafter, it is for the petitioner to work out his remedies regarding permission for change of user of the land as well as for consequential alteration in the BTR in accordance with law._ 8. Since the respondent-Secretary of the Municipality has issued Ext.P-9 stop memo dated 16.5.2019 in W.P.(C).No.15185/2020 and the impugned order in W.P.(C).No.34533/2020 refusing to grant renewal of trade licenses without due regard to the abovesaid State Government Circular dated 13.8.2018, the said impugned orders of the respondentMunicpality will stand set aside and quashed solely on the ground of not taking into account the impact of Government Circular dated 13.8.2018. The matters in that regard will stand remitted to the respondent-Secretary of the Municipality, both for the change of occupancy certificate referred to in Ext.P-9 in W.P.(C).No.15185/2020 and also regard to the renewal of the trade licence sought for by the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.34533/2020 which may be reconsidered taking into consideration the Government Circular dated 13.8.2018 as well as the applicable Building Rules. So also application for renewal of trade licence may be reconsidered in the light of Government Circular dated 13.8.2018 and in the light of the dictum laid ::15:: ## **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** down by the Full Bench of this Court in _**Tomy Thomas v. State of Kerala**_ , [2019 (3) KLT 987 (FB)]. Until a decision is taken on the renewal of the trade licence, the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.34533/2019 may be permitted to conduct the trade in the abovesaid shop rooms on a provisional basis, but subject to strict compliance of all the other applicable norms regarding the functioning of such trade. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.15185/2020 will produce certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the memorandum before the respondent-LLMC, KSREC, RDO, Secretary of the Chavakkad Municipality for necessary information and further action. The petitioner in W.P. (C).No.34533/2019 will produce a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the memorandum of the Writ Petition before the respondent-Secretary of the Chavakkad Municipality for necessary information and further action. With these observations and directions both the Writ Petitions will stand finally disposed of. **Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** - bkn/ ::16:: **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15185/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO. 18/2007 OF CHAVAKKAD S.R.O DATED 01-01-2007 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO. 629/2008 OF CHAVAKKAD S.R.O DATED 12-032008 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO. 1650/2009 OF CHAVAKKAD S.R.O DATED 22-062009 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE CHAVAKKAD MUNICIPALITY DATED 10-052007 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE CHAVAKKAD MUNICIPALITY DATED 25-052013 EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF TFAIR VALUE DETAILS OF PROPERTY SITUATED IN SURVEY NO. 195/4 MANATHALA VILLAGE OF CHAVAKKAD TALUK OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA DATED NIL. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF FAIR VALUE DETAILS OF PROPERTY SITUTATED IN SURVEY NO. 195/5 OF MANATHALA VILLAGE OF CHAVAKKAD TALUK OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA DATED NIL. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 25-08-2017 EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT INTIMATING THE REJECTION OF OCCUPANCY CHANGE DATED 16-05-2019 EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C) NO 34533/2019 DATED 08-01-2020** ::17:: **W.P(C) No.15185 /2020 & 34533/2019** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34533/2019** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF CLINICAL LABORATORY ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 23.06.2009 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF DRUG LICENSE ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT DRUGS CONTROLLER, THRISSUR DATED 07.07.2009** **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL SHOP LICENCE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 09.07.2009** **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF CLINICAL LABORATORY LASTLY ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 23.06.2016 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF MEDICAL SHOP LICENCE LASTLY ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 23.06.2016 EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF PROFESSION TAX RECEIPT DATED 01.08.2018 EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF PROFESSION TAX RECEIPT DATED 14.07.2019 EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF PROFESSION TAX RECEIPT DATED 03.09.2019 EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF PROFESSION TAX RECEIPT DATED 22.07.2019 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.18/2007 OF CHAVAKKAD SRO DATED 01.01.2007 EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY DATED 10.05.2007 EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE CONVENER, LLMC DATED NIL**