Dispute is with respect to numbering of a building situated within the limits of the respondent panchayat, constructed in property comprised in Sy. No.93/1 of Koodali Village. The petitioner claims that he has got ownership over the land and the building by virtue of Ext.P1 Deed of Assignment executed by his brother, in the year 1991. It is pointed out that the building in question was numbered as KP V/717 and the petitioner was paying property tax till the year 1994-95 as evidenced from Exts.P2 & P3. During the year 2000 the respondent panchayat took a decision to refuse acceptance of property tax from the petitioner. The said decision, dated 16-05-2000 was subjected to challenge in appeal before the Deputy Director of Panchayats, Kannur. Exhibit P5 is the proceedings issued by the Deputy Director disposing the appeal. Findings contained in Ext.P5 is to the effect that the building bearing No.V/717 was demolished and it was removed from the records. It was observed that the panchayat had opined that, there exists only partly completed building in the property and no building number was assigned because the construction is not completed. The Deputy Director had disposed of the appeal directing numbering of the building as and when the construction is completed. Stand taken by the panchayat before the Deputy Director was that, in the place of the building which existed earlier a new construction was seen made with concrete slab put on 4 pillars and the building had no side walls or doors.
2. Exhibit P5 appellate order was passed as early as on 21-11-2000. According to the petitioner, the matter was not pursued further because there existed some civil disputes based on an attachment on the property in execution of a decree passed against the brother of the petitioner, who is the assignor of the property. It is stated that by virtue of Ext.P4 judgment of this court the dispute relating to execution of the decree was settled and title of the petitioner over the property was declared. In the year 2007 the petitioner had again approached the respondent panchayat seeking to assign number to the building. Exhibit P6 application was submitted in this regard. Through Ext.P7 letter the Secretary of the panchayat had instructed the petitioner to produce sketch of the property obtained from the village office inorder to ascertain its boundaries. The petitioner had produced Ext.P8 sketch issued by the village officer. But the Secretary had issued Ext.P9 letter (Ext.R1 (a)) directing the petitioner to demolish some portion of the building, which is not having 3 Meter set back from the boundary of Chalode-Irikkoor Road. It is informed that the request for numbering can be considered only after compliance of the said direction. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P9 in this writ petition.
3. Contention of the petitioner is that there is no violation of Section 220 (b) of Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, because by virtue of the proviso to Section 220 (b) there is no requirement of 3 meter set back for re-
construction or for addition or for extension of an existing building. The factum of existence of a building in the property in question, which was numbered as V/717, upto the year 1994-95 is evident from Exts.P2 & P3. So also it is evident from Ext.P5 proceedings that the respondent panchayat had conceded that there existed such a building. Even at the time of Ext.P5 there was a structure of concrete slab and pillars situated at the place of the building, was coceded. Therefore the building now completed re- construction is entitled to be assigned with number dehors provisions contained in Section 220 (b), is the submission.
4. The above aspect need decision based on factual aspects prevailing and also based on materials and records available in the panchayat. More over a decision in this regard need to be taken based on the directions contained in Ext.P5, to the extent it is relevant under the present situation. Exhibit P9 is only a notice issued by the Secretary directing demolition of a portion of the building allegedly violating Section 220 (b). The petitioner could very well point out all the above aspects before the competent authority in the respondent panchayat and in such case it is for the said authority to take an appropriate decision taking note of all the above aspects. Therefore it is only just and proper to direct the respondent panchayat or any competent authority in the respondent to take an appropriate decision in the matter, after affording opportunity to the petitioner.
5. Hence this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent to take an appropriate decision on the request of the petitioner for assigning number to the building in question, after affording opportunity to the petitioner to submit detailed statement/objection against Ext.P9 notice, and affording an opportunity of personal hearing to him. A decision in this regard shall be taken by the respondent at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
6. Needless to observe that if the petitioner is in any manner aggrieved by any decision which will be taken by the respondent he will be at liberty to seek appropriate statutory remedy against such decision.
AMG Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE True copy P.A. to Judge