ZABIN HAROON v. THE STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.14918 OF 2020(L)** ## **PETITIONER:** **ZABIN HAROON, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.A.M.HAROON, SABHA COTTAGE, CHENGAMANADU VILLAGE, DESOM P.O., ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 102.** **BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** - **2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI, PIN - 682 001.** - **3 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE OF CHENGAMANADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHENGAMANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 578.** - **4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHENGAMANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 578.** - **5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THE VILLAGE OFFICE, CHENGAMANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 578.** - **6 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,KERALA STATE AUDIT DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT AUDIT OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682 030.** - **7 THE CHENGAMANADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CHENGAMANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 578.** - **8 THE SECRETARY, THE CHENGAMANADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH CHENGAMANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN - 683 578.** **SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI ANIL K.MUHAMMED, STANDING COUNSEL** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).No.14918/2020 ::2:: ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ------------------------------------W.P(C).No.14918 of 2020 -------------------------------------Dated this the 4[th] day of August, 2020. ## J U D G M E N T The case set up in this Writ Petition (Civil) is as follows: _The petitioner is the owner in possession of an extent of 29.70 ares of immovable property which is made up of 15 Ares is comprised in Resurvey number 358/7 and 7.60 Ares in resurvey number 358/8 and 7.10 Ares in resurvey number 358/9-2 of Chengamanadu Village in Aluva Taluk, in Ernakulam District, which is lying as a single unit. The property is a dry land and situated near the National Highway Stretch from Ernakulam to Thrissur. The property is not a paddy land as per Exhibit P1 data bank, with remarks converted prior to the year 2004. By Ext.P3 building permit dated 06.09.2011, the petitioner was permitted to construct a double storied building and after completing the said construction, based on a revised plan the permit was renewed on 13.07.2015, with effect from 06.09.2014 to_ ::3:: ## WP(C).No.14918/2020 _05.09.2017, by which the total construction permitted was extended to ground plus three floors and a roof garden. The petitioner almost completed the construction, but since the finishing touches were not completed, the permit was again extended from 05.09.2017 to 05.09.2020 by order dated 25.06.2018. When the construction was completed the petitioner was issued with Exhibit P4 notice dated 21.02.2019, by the 8[th] respondent, stating that in view of the local fund audit report stating that residential buildings alone can be constructed in lands converted prior to 12.08.2008, the petitioner was asked to show cause why the permit should not be cancelled. The petitioner gave Exhibit P5 reply and on 13.03.2019 the petitioner gave completion plan and completion certificate which is evident from Exhibit P6. To Exhibit P6, the petitioner was given a reply stating that the matter was sent to Adalath as per Exhibit P7. The petitioner gave Exhibit P8 reply to Exhibit P7. Building Tax as per the Kerala Building Tax to the tune of Rs.5,34,600/ was assessed in respect of the building and the same was paid, which is evident from Exhibit P9 to P12, The Adalath, by Exhibit P13 dated 06.09.2019, decided that the petitioner will have to_ ::4:: ## WP(C).No.14918/2020 _move under Section 27A of Act 28 of 2008. The petitioner had replied that in view of the various judgments and government circulars on the point, there is no need to apply under Section 27A of the Act. The 6[th] respondent issued Exhibit P14 order stating that the petitioner has to produce the court orders based on which permit was issued. By Exhibit P15, the 8[th] respondent informed that the petitioner has to regularize the construction by moving under Section 27A of the Act. As per Exhibit P16 Government Circular of Director of Panchayath the petitioner need not obtain orders under Section 27A of the Act which came into effect only on 30.12.2017 and amendments in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Rules which mandates payments, which had come into existence only on 15.12.2018. Exhibit P3 building permit was issued on 06.09.2011. This writ petition is filed for quashing Exhibit P4, P7, P13 and P14 and to declare that Section 27 A of Act 28 of 2008 and corresponding Rules are not applicable to the petitioner's building and for further directing the 8[th] respondent to issue occupancy certificate and number to the petitioner's building, if the same is otherwise in order._ It is in the light of these averments ::5:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 ## and contentions that the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition with the following prayers: - _“i. To issue a writ of certiorari calling for the originals of Exhibits P4, P7, P13 to P15 and to quash the same._ - _ii. To declare that Section 27 A of Act 28 of 2008 and the Rules made thereunder mandating payments are not applicable to the petitioner's building constructed on the basis of Exhibit P1 permit and subsequent renewals._ - _iii. To declare that Section 27A of Act 28 of 2008 and the Rules made thereunder mandating payments do not have retrospective operation._ - _iv. To issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction to the 8[th] respondent to issue occupancy certificate and number to the building constructed by the petitioner on the basis of Exhibit P3._ - _v. To grant such other reliefs as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper.”_ 2. Heard Sri.George Sebastian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6 and Sri.Anil K.Muhammed, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 7 & 8 (Chengamanad Grama Panchayath). 3. The case of the petitioner is that, he has secured Ext.P-3 building permit dated 6.9.2011 issued by the 8[th] respondent-Secretary of the Grama Panchayath concerned for constructing a commercial building (for housing a hotel) in the subject property which has been converted prior to 2008 Act even ::6:: ## WP(C).No.14918/2020 though it has been described in the BTR as nilam/paddy land. Further that, the petitioner has also secured renewal of those building permit as can be seen from the endorsements made for such renewal in Ext.P-3. It appears that the petitioner has been confronted with the impugned notices as per Exts.P4, P-7, P-13 & P-14 issued by the respondent-authorities concerned informing that the request of the petitioner for grant of occupancy certificate and grant of building number to the completed construction can be considered only after the petitioner gets necessary order from the statutory officials concerned for permission for change of user of land in terms of provisions contained in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. 4. Now it is beyond any dispute that the competent authority of the respondent-State Government in the Local Self Government Department has issued Ext.P-16 Government Circular No.LSGD-406/RA/2018-LSGD dated 13.8.2018 in which it has been held that in cases where building permit has already been granted prior to 30.12.2017 (date of coming into force of the amended provisions of the State Act 28 of 2018, which has been introduced Sec.27A thereof) to effect construction in such ::7:: ## WP(C).No.14918/2020 properties and even if the construction has not been completed before 30.12.2017 the local bodies concerned could consider the request of the party concerned for occupancy certificate, grant of building number, etc., to the completed construction without reference to the nature of the land as Sec.27A has been brought into force prospectively from 30.12.2017. Ext.P-16 Government Circular dated 13.8.2018 reads as follows: “2018 ലലെ കകേരള ലനെൽവയൽ തണണ്ണിർത്തട സസംരക്ഷണ (കഭേദഗതണ്ണി) ആകക്ട് 30/12/2017 തതീയ്യതണ്ണി പപ്രാബലെല്യത്തണ്ണിൽ വനണ്ണിട്ടുള്ളതപ്രാണക്ട്. പസ് **ത** ു ആകണ്ണിലലെ വകുപക്ട് 27 (എ) ലെപ്രാണക്ട് വണ്ണിജപ്രാപനെസം ലചെയ്യലപടപ്രാത്ത ഭൂമണ്ണിയണ്ണിലലെ നെണ്ണിർമപ്രാണപ്രാനുമതണ്ണിലയ കുറണ്ണിചക്ട് പതണ്ണിപപ്രാദണ്ണിക്കുനതക്ട്. എനപ്രാൽ 30/12/2017 നെക്ട് മുമക്ട് തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയസംഭേരണ സപ്രാപനെങ്ങളണ്ണിൽ നെണ്ണിനക്ട് ആകണ്ണിലന്റെ പപ്രാബലെല്യതണ്ണിയ്യതണ്ണികക്ട് മുൻപക്ട് നെണ്ണിർമപ്രാണപ്രാനുമതണ്ണി നെൽകേണ്ണിയണ്ണിട്ടുള്ളതസം എനപ്രാൽ ടണ്ണി ആകക്ട് നെണ്ണിലെവണ്ണിൽ വനതണ്ണിനു കശഷസം നെണ്ണിർമപ്രാണസം പൂർത്തണ്ണിയപ്രാകണ്ണിയണ്ണിട്ടുള്ളതമപ്രായ ലകേടണ്ണിടങ്ങൾകക്ട് ഒക്കുലപൻസണ്ണി / ലകേടണ്ണിട നെമർ ലെഭേണ്ണിക്കുനതണ്ണിനെപ്രായണ്ണി ബന്ധലപട തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയസംഭേരണ സപ്രാപനെങ്ങലള സമതീപണ്ണിക് **ക** ുമപ്രാൾ ആകണ്ണിലലെ വല്യവസകേൾ പകേപ് **ര** ാസം ബന്ധലപട റവനെന്യൂ ഡണ്ണിവണ്ണിഷണൽ ഓഫതീസറുലട സമതപതo അനുമതണ്ണി / നെണ്ണിഷ്കർഷണ്ണിച്ചു ലകേപ്രാണക്ട് അകപക്ഷകേൾ നെണ്ണിരസണ്ണിക്കുനതപ്രായണ്ണി സർകപ്രാറണ്ണിലന്റെ ശ്രദ്ധയണ്ണിൽലപടണ്ണിട്ടുണക്ട്. സർകപ്രാർ ഇകപ് **ര** ാല്യസം വണ്ണിശദമപ്രായണ്ണി പരണ്ണികശപ്രാധണ്ണിച്ചു. 2018 ലലെ കകേരള ലനെൽവയൽ തണതീർത്തട സസംരക്ഷണ (കഭേദഗതണ്ണി) ആകക്ട് നെണ്ണിലെവണ്ണിൽ വരുനതണ്ണിനെക്ട് മുമക്ട് അനുവദണ്ണിചണ്ണിട്ടുള്ള നെണ്ണിർമപ്രാണ ലപർമണ്ണിറക്ട് പകേപ് **ര** ാസം പൂർത്തണ്ണികേരണ്ണിചണ്ണിട്ടുള്ള ലകേടണ്ണിടങ്ങൾകക്ട് ഒക്കുലപൻസണ്ണി/ലകേടണ്ണിട നെമർ അനുവദണ്ണിക്കുനതണ്ണിനെപ്രായണ്ണി 30/12/2017 തതീയ്യതണ്ണികക്ട് കശഷസം വന നെണ്ണിലെവണ്ണിൽ ആകണ്ണിലലെ വകുപ്പുകേൾ പകേപ് **ര** ാമുള്ള കരഖകേൾ നെണ്ണിഷ്കർഷണ്ണിക്കുനതക്ട് ശരണ്ണിയപ്രായ നെടപടണ്ണിയലല്ലെനക്ട് കേപ്രാണുന. അതണ്ണിനെപ്രാൽ 30/12/2017 നെക്ട് മുമക്ട് അനക്ട് നെണ്ണിലെവണ്ണിലെണ്ണിരുന ചെടങ്ങളസം വല്യവസകേളസം പപ്രാലെണ്ണിചക്ട് അത പകേപ് **ര** ാസം സമർപണ്ണിചണ്ണിട്ടുള്ള അകപക്ഷകേളണ്ണിൽ ബന്ധലപട തകദ്ദേശ സസ്വയസംഭേരണ സപ്രാപനെസം എല്ലെപ്രാ വണ്ണിധ പരണ്ണികശപ്രാധനെകേളസം നെടത്തണ്ണി ചെടവണ്ണികധയമപ്രാലണനക്ട് ഉറപ്പു വരുത്തണ്ണിയതണ്ണിനു കശഷസം അനുവദണ്ണിചണ്ണിട്ടുള്ള ::8:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 നെണ്ണിർമപ്രാണ പർമണ്ണിറക്ട് പകേപ് **ര** ാസം പൂർത് **ത** കേരണ്ണിച ലകേടണ്ണിടങ്ങൾകക്ട് ഒക്കു ലപൻസണ്ണി / ലകേടണ്ണിട നെമറണ്ണിനെപ്രായണ്ണി സമർപണ്ണിക്കുന അകപക്ഷകേളണ്ണിൽ 2018 ലലെ കകേരള ലനെൽവയൽ തണതീർത്തട സസംരക്ഷണ (കഭേദഗതണ്ണി) ആകണ്ണിലലെ (2018 ലലെ 29) വല്യവസകേൾ ബപ്രാധകേമലല്ലെനസം പസ് **ത** ു ലകേടണ്ണിട നെണ്ണിർമപ്രാണ ലപർമണ്ണിറക്ട് നെൽകുകമപ്രാൾ നെണ്ണിലെവണ്ണിലുണപ്രായണ്ണിരുന നെണ്ണിയമങ്ങൾ ആണക്ട് ടണ്ണി ലകേടണ്ണിടങ്ങൾകക്ട് ഒക്കുലപൻസണ്ണി / ലകേടണ്ണിട നെമർ നെൽക്കുന അവസരത്തണ്ണിൽ ബപ്രാധകേലമനസം ഇതണ്ണിനെപ്രാൽ അറണ്ണിയണ്ണിക്കുന.” 5. This Court has already held in the common judgment dated 30.7.2020 in W.P.(C).Nos.14707/2020 & 2230/2020 as well as the judgment dated 3.8.2020 in W.P.(C).No.11306/2020 that, in such cases where building permit has already been granted by the local body concerned prior to 30.12.2017 (date of coming into force of the amended provisions of the 2008 Act which has been introduced Sec.27A thereof) to effect construction in such property which has been converted as garden land/purayidam prior to 12.8.2008 (date of coming into force of the 2008 Act) even though the property has been described in the unaltered BTR as nilam/paddy land, then the local body concerned could consider the request of those parties for grant of occupancy certificate and grant of building number to such completed construction even if those constructions have been completed after 30.12.2017. Moreover, this Court has also held in the decisions of this Court as in _**Mahin v. Keezhmad Grama Panchayat [2020 (2) KLT**_ ::9:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 ## _**478], Soumini v. Naduvannur Grama Panchayath [2017 (1)**_ _**KLT 168]**_ , etc., that where the local body has so granted building permit in such cases, then later the local body will be legally estopped from raising objections for request for additional construction, renewal of building permit, grant of occupancy certificate, grant of building number, etc., cannot be granted by raising objections based on the unaltered descriptions of the property as nilam/paddy land, etc. 6. In the light of the abovesaid dictum already settled by this Court in a series of cases, it is ordered that the impugned orders in this case as in Exts.P4, P-7, P-13 & P-14 is illegal and unreasonable and will stand quashed and set aside, as there is no dispute that the petitioner has secured building permit from the Grama Panchayath as per Ext.P-3 on 6.9.2011 and the same has also been renewed twice and since the building permit has been so issued prior to 30.12.2017, the plea for occupancy certificate, grant of building number has to be considered in terms of the statutory building rules and without reference to the nature of land. The position in that regard is declared and ordered in this case as well. ::10:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 7. Accordingly, it is ordered that the 8[th] respondentSecretary of the Grama Panchayath will take up the application made by the petitioner for grant of occupancy certificate and for grant of building number for the completed construction as referred to in Ext.P-6 receipt dated 13.3.2019 for consideration without much delay and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through his authorised representative/counsel, if any, should pass orders thereon in accordance with the Kerala Panchayath Building Rules, 2011, which was in vogue at the time of issuance of Ext.P-3 building permit dated 6.9.2011 and orders in that regard should be passed within 3 weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the provisions contained in the abovesaid Government Circular dated 13-08-2018 as well as the previous circulars issued by the State Government in that regard, in cases like this the party like the petitioner will be entitled to get fresh assessment of the subject property in terms of Sec.6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, so as to secure additional entries in the BTR to show the changed ::11:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 nature of the land as garden land or purayidam instead of the earlier BTR entries as ‘nilam/paddy land’, as the State Government in exercise of its sovereign executive power has issued circulars in the nature of the one as per the circular dated 13-08-2018, giving benefits to the property holders to enjoy the properties as ordered therein and therefore the said decision of the State Government would amount to exercise of the powers of the State Government to recognise the subject property as in the instant one as dry land, which is fit for building construction and since the said Government Circulars exempt the party like the petitioner from going through the rigorous procedure of Sec.27A and even if they have not obtained orders of conversion under Rule 6 (2) of the KLU Order, they are statutorily entitled to get fresh assessment of the subject property for alteration of the BTR etc, and that in view of the abovesaid decision of the State Government as reflected in the abovesaid Government Circular, the existing entries in the BTR would become superfluous and redundant and the exceptional situations in Rule 6(2) of the KLU Order and the provisions of State Act 28 of 2008 including Sec.27A thereof, would not be applicable in such case and therefore it should be ordered that the ::12:: ## WP(C).No.14918/2020 party like the petitioner to be entitled to get the benefit of such alteration in the BTR. 9. After hearing both sides, it is seen that such an issue is not raised by the petitioner in the pleadings and materials on the record. Moreover the statutory Officer in that regard, is the Tahsildar is not made a party. Hence, issues in that regard are left open and it is for the petitioner to raise such issue before the competent revenue officials like Tahsildar and after securing the completion certificate and building number, the petitioner may file such representation/application along with a copy of this judgment before the Tahsildar concerned seeking for such benefits and if so, the respondent Tahsildar shall take decision in the said matter taking note of the abovesaid contentions of the petitioner. Therefore issues in that regard, are left open to be raised before the competent authority and thereafter in case, the petitioner has any legally justiciable grievances thereto, including delay on the part of the Tahsildar concerned to take decision etc, it will be open to the petitioner to work out his remedies in the manner known to law. No other directions and orders are called for in this case. 10. The petitioner will produce certified copy of this ::13:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 judgment along with copy of the memorandum of the Writ Petition with all exhibits before the 8[th] respondent for necessary information and further action. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of. Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE bkn MMG ::14:: WP(C).No.14918/2020 ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PUBLISHED DATA BANK DATED 23/02/2012 PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT DATED 29/06/2011.** **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 06/09/2011 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21/02/2019 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED NIL ALONG WITH ITS RECEIPT DATED 23/03/2019.** - **EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT DATED 13/03/2019.** - **EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 30/05/2019 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 03/08/2019 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 05/07/2019 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, ALUVA.** - **EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 09/07/2019 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24/7/2019 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 14/08/2019 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.** ::15:: ## WP(C).No.14918/2020 **EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT SUPERVISOR, PERFORMANCE AUDIT UNIT-3 NEDUMABASSERY DATED 06/09/2019. EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 30/06/2020 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16/07/2020 PASSED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 13/08/2018 ISSUED BY STATE OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 24/06/2019 ISSUED BY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPIES OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE AND LIE OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER AND SURROUNDINGS PROPERTIES.**