2022 (10) TMI 186 - HC - Indian Laws

Application for building permit - respondents are refusing to consider the same on the ground that a portion of the property is still retained as nilam in the revenue records - petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to appear before the Secretary of the Panchayat, with all relevant records and that the application may be considered after hearing the petitioner also - HELD THAT - There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up the application submitted by the petitioner for building permit and to consider and pass orders on the same, after hearing the petitioner through any appropriate means including video conferencing. The petitioner shall be free to produce all the documents relied on by him before the 2nd respondent for a proper consideration of the application. Appropriate orders shall be passed on the application submitted by the petitioner, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Summary

Issues:
Seeking directions for building permit issuance based on application submission.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking directions for the issuance of a building permit based on an application submitted by him. The petitioner, along with a co-owner, claimed ownership of specific property portions as per Ext.P1 sale deed. Despite a previous order by the Tahasildar regarding a portion shown as nilam, the petitioner's building permit application was not being considered due to the same reason. The petitioner expressed willingness to present all relevant records before the Panchayat Secretary for a fair hearing. Consequently, the court directed the 2nd respondent to review the building permit application, allowing the petitioner to provide all necessary documents for consideration. The decision on the application was mandated to be made within three weeks from the judgment's receipt.

This judgment highlights the importance of due process and fair consideration in matters of building permit applications. It underscores the need for authorities to assess applications based on merit and relevant documentation, ensuring that all concerned parties have the opportunity to present their case effectively. The court's intervention in directing a timely review and decision on the application emphasizes the significance of administrative accountability and adherence to legal procedures in such matters. The judgment serves as a reminder of the principles of natural justice and the obligation of authorities to act fairly and promptly in processing permit applications, safeguarding the rights of property owners and ensuring transparent decision-making processes.