Silvana Corbani vs Edava Grama Panchayath on 7 December, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35096 of 2009(F)


1. SILVANA CORBANI, MANAGING DIRECTOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. EDAVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EDAVA PO,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY, EDAVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

 Dated :07/12/2009

 O R D E R
        THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J
  ...........................................
          WP(C).NO.35096     OF   2009
  ............................................
  DATED THIS THE   7TH  DAY OF  DECEMBER, 2009

                    JUDGMENT

The second respondent is the Secretary of

the first respondent Grama Panchayat. Notice to

respondents dispensed with preserving their

right to move for rehearing of this writ

petition, if aggrieved.

2. On the strength of an assignment in its

favour, the petitioner applied for change of

the name of the owner of the building in

question, in the assessment register of the

Grama Panchayat. Going by the impugned Ext.P3,

the Secretary of Grama panchayat records that

the rights of the erstwhile owner has been

transferred to the petitioner. But, the change

of the entries in the assessment register

regarding the name of the owner is refused on

the ground that the petitioner is likely to put

Wpc 35096/09 2

up a resort and on local inspection it has come

out that the petitioner’s intention is to put

up a resort. That is not a ground to refuse to

make entry regarding change of ownership.

Putting up a resort or putting the land to any

other use by making constructions would be a

matter that would arise for decision only when

request for permission in that regard comes up

for consideration. The impugned order and the

reasons stated therein, essentially affects the

rights of the petitioner under the Panchayat

Raj Act and also fundamental rights referable

to Part III of the Constitution. There is no

prohibition either in Panchayat Raj Act or in

Transfer of Property Act pointed out by the

Secretary, in terms of which transfer in favour

of the petitioner is void.

3. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ

petition is allowed quashing Ext.P5 directing

Wpc 35096/09 3

the Grama Panchayat Secretary to take up the

request of the petitioner for change of the

name of the owner in the assessment register

and issue decision on such request without

reference to the reasons stated in Ext.P3. Let

this be done within three weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE

lgk/8/12