JUDGMENT
The petitioners obtained Ext.P2 building permit on 24.03.2015 based on which they completed the construction. They were served with Ext.P7 notice on 25.06.2022, under Rule 16 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 2019, a show cause notice issued seeking to cancel the permit granted to the petitioners. The Municipality had also passed orders such as Ext.P8 and Ext.P9 cancelling the building numbers assigned. The petitioners submit that they had given Ext.P10 reply on 08.04.2023 and moved the Tribunal for LSG Institutions against the actions of the Municipality, which however was dismissed by Ext.P12 order dated 20.12.2023 finding that the appeal to be time bared as the same was not filed within thirty days from the order dated 26.08.2022, Ext.P9.
2. The writ petition challenges Exts.P7 to P9 orders cancelling the building numbers and also to permit the
3
petitioners to remit the building tax for the buildings bearing Nos.19/69H, 19/69H1, and 19/69H2 in re-survey No.11/23 in Ramanattukara Village.
3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the Municipality wherein it is stated that the petitioners were given a permit only for the construction of a building having a plinth area of 68.51 sq. mtrs, but they have carried out construction to the extent of 226.48 sq.mtrs which was a violation of the permit as well as the Kerala Municipality Building Rules 1999. The petitioners also submitted an application for regularization on 20.12.2019 with a new plan but without mentioning the already existing building number.
4. The municipality also submits that the petitioners were helped by a Revenue Inspector of the Municipality who illegally helped four building owners including the petitioners to get their building numbered. Action was taken against the said officer and a crime was also registered alleging offences punishable under Section 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 66C and 66D of the IT (Amendment) Act 2008. Vigilance proceedings were also initiated against the Revenue Inspector
4
who was suspended from duty on 06.07.2022. Thus, the Municipality contends that the petitioners were assigned the building number by the wrong actions of its officials.
5. Be that as it may, the cancellation of the building number seven years after assigning the same cannot be justified irrespective of the reason stated by the Municipality. However, it is seen that the petitioners have constructed the building in violation of the permit as well as the Municipality Building Rules. It will be open to the Municipality to issue an appropriate notice to the petitioners precisely pointing out the violations. The petitioners may either cure the defects or seek a regularisation if the same is permissible under law. The impugned orders cancelling the building numbers for the reasons stated cannot be sustained and the same is quashed. However, it is made clear that the quashing of the impugned orders will not deprive the power of the Municipality to initiate appropriate action against the petitioners for unauthorized construction. The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P
JUDGE
Anu
5
Exhibit P9
A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.R2-6992/22
DATED 26.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE 5TH
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS
Exhibit P10
A TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION
PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE
THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P11
A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS BEFORE THE HON'BLE LOCAL
SELF GOVERNMENT TRIBUNAL
Exhibit P12
A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
20.12.2023 IN UNNUMBERED APPEAL OF
2023 (CF NO.5137/2023) PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT TRIBUNAL
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-R5(A)
A TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF BUILDINGS
FOUND WITH ILLEGAL NUMBERS DATED NIL
EXHIBIT-R5(B)
A TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER
ISSUED TO THE REVENUE INSPECTOR DATED
06.07.2022
7