Thomas P.V. & Anr. vs Eldose K.V & Ors.

SOUMEN SEN, C.J.

The private respondents have preferred the present appeal along with an application seeking condonation of a delay of 163 days in filing the appeal. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners submits that she has been served with copies of the application for condonation of delay as well as the stay petition in Court and prays that the matter may be adjourned to enable her to take appropriate steps. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants also.

The matter arises out of a challenge to the sanctioning of a building permit. The proceedings were initiated before the Tribunal, in which, the Tribunal held that, in terms of Section 185B of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the Secretary is the sole authority to take decisions independently without any interference or influence by the Panchayath, President or Committee in the matter of issuance of building permit. The power conferred on the Secretary has to be exercised in the manner as provided under Section 185B which has to be done independently and solely by him and without any interference or influence by the Panchayath, the President or Chairman of the Committee as held in Dharmadom Paristhithi Samrakshana Samithi v. Dharmadom Grama Panchayath reported in 2010 (2) KLT 194.

The learned Single Judge, after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, passed an interim order, being satisfied that the petitioner, on the strength of the building permit, was being prevented from affecting the relevant construction. However, the learned Single Judge was conscious of the issue that, in the event the order of the Tribunal is set aside, the entire construction made by the writ petitioners would be liable to be demolished. It was further directed that the factory shall not be made operational without the leave of the Court, thereby affording adequate protection to the present appellants.

The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the matter is ready for hearing. We do not propose to issue any direction to the learned Single Judge to dispose of the matter within any particular time frame. It shall be open to the learned counsel for the parties to mention the matter before the learned Single Judge for early hearing of the writ petition. It would be entirely open to the learned Single Judge to fix an appropriate date for hearing of the writ petition. We are of the view that the jurisdiction exercised by the learned Single Judge does not call for any interference at this stage, and all issues are left open for consideration by the learned Single Judge.

We make it clear that any construction made by the writ petitioners shall not create any equity in their favour and, in the event the challenge to the building permit is allowed, it shall be the responsibility of the writ petitioners to restore the land to its original position. We also make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case.

The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. The delay condonation application filed along with this appeal is allowed and the delay stands condoned.