Thresiamma Simon v. State of Kerala and others
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- P.V. Kunhikrishnan
- Judgment Date
- 2022-06-01
- Court Decision / Holding
- The writ petition is disposed of with specific directions: The petitioner may submit a representation before the 2nd respondent within two weeks from receipt of a copy of this judgment, narrating her grievance. The 2nd respondent/authorized officer shall consider the representation and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 6 and 7; a report from the 7th respondent and the Panchayat shall be obtained prior to passing orders. The 2nd respondent shall issue orders expeditiously, within two months from the receipt of the judgment copy. The 6th respondent is directed to issue a notice to the petitioner about other defects, if any, within two weeks of receipt of the judgment, and the petitioner may cure or explain within two weeks of receiving the notice. After the explanation, the 6th respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner.
- Final Disposition
- Disposed of
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Thresiamma Simon, aged 48 years, wife of Simon, Tharakan House, Mattom P.O., Thrissur, PIN-680 602
Respondents
- State of Kerala represented by the Principal Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Govt. Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN-695 001
- The District Collector, Collectorate, Ayyanthole, First Floor, Civil Lines Road, Kalyan Nagar, Ayyanthole, Thrissur, PIN-680 003
- The Town Planner Office of District Town Planner, LSGD Planning District Planning Bhavan, 2nd Floor, Ayyanthole, Thrissur, PIN-680 022
- The Tahsildar (Land Records), Mini Civil Station, Kakkad, Yesudas Road, Kunnamkulam, Thrissur, PIN-680 503
- The Village Officer Aloor Village, Thrissur, PIN-680 683
- Kandanasseri Grama Panchayath represented by its Secretary, Choondal Mattom Road, Mattom, Thrissur, PIN-680 602
- Assistant Executive Engineer (Road Division), Chavakkad, Thrissur, PIN-680 506
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • N.L. Bitto
Counsels for Respondents
- • SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE
- • SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL
- • R. RAJITHA
- • M.C. ASHI
- • CHITHRA S. BABU
- • R.N. SANDEEP
Case Synopsis & Summary
The petitioner, Thresiamma Simon, sought to compel numbering of a building constructed in 2000 on her property based on Ext.P2 NOC issued by the Panchayat. For about 22 years the building has remained unnumbered, with the Panchayat citing multiple defects and a lack of adequate setback from the adjacent PWD road as grounds for inaction. Representations to the Panchayat and the District Town Planner for numbering and regularization were rejected, and the Panchayat contended that there are procedural and construction-related defects, including violations of Rules 47 and 104 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011, and Section 220(b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. The Tahsildar, after inspection by the Taluk Surveyor, reportedly opined that the petitioner has not encroached, and the petitioner asserts she has left a setback of 5.4 meters from the road. The State and other respondents argue caution and procedural compliance, and that numbering cannot be done without addressing these defects. The Court contemplated a resolution by district-level authorities, allowing the petitioner to file a representation before the 2nd respondent within two weeks, and directing the 2nd respondent to obtain reports, provide hearing, and pass orders within two months. It also requires issuance of notices for other defects and possible cure or explanation by the petitioner.
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioner submits that she constructed a building in 2000 on the strength of Ext.P2 NOC issued by the 6th respondent Panchayath. Despite the long lapse of 22 years, the building remains unnumbered. The petitioner asserts there is no encroachment and that Tahsildar’s report after inspection by the Taluk Surveyor confirms this. She contends that the setback from the PWD road is 5.4 meters, and that the Panchayat’s insistence on further verification of road width and boundaries is unwarranted. Representations made to the Panchayat and to the District Town Planner seeking numbering and Ext.P8 relief have been rejected. The petitioner seeks a mandamus directing the 6th respondent to number the building and to pass orders on Ext.P8 within two months, and directs the 2nd respondent to consider the representation after hearing and after obtaining reports from the PWD and Panchayat, with opportunity for all affected parties to be heard. She also seeks a prompt resolution by addressing other alleged defects. Her prayer is for a writ of mandamus or other appropriate relief in the interest of justice.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents contend that the building violates set-back requirements with respect to the PWD road and that there are multiple defects under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, including Section 220(b), and Rules 47 and 104 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. They submit that numbering cannot be done in isolation and require a district-level review, including reports from the PWD and Panchayat, and an opportunity for hearing. They argue that the 2nd respondent, after receiving representations, must obtain relevant reports and conduct a hearing before passing appropriate orders. They request due process and caution in applying the law, given the discrepancies in the setback, violations alleged under the Rules, and the potential need for corrective measures. They emphasize that Ext.P2 is not a final sanction and that compliance with statutory safeguards is essential before numbering and regularization can be granted.
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Thresiamma Simon v. State of Kerala and others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.