IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE23D DAY OF SEPTEMBER20131ST ASWINA, 1935 WP(C).No. 782 of 2013 (W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- MINI.K.N.,AGED46YEARS, D/O.NARAYANAN, KAPPLIYIL HOUSE, MURIKKUMVAYAL KARINILAM, P.O.MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM - 686 002.
3. MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 686 513. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR R3 BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2309-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.782/2013 (W) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED410/2012 AND THE RECEIPT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMNICATION NO.A2 10834/2012 DATED1611/2012. EXT.P3:TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERUMELI DATED912/2011. EXT.P4:TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DRIVING LICENSE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5:TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED1711/2012. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED3011/2012. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDAER DTD. 11/10/2010 IN CMP.NO.7440/2010 IN CMP74392010. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
IN CMP51602012 IN M.C.2/2011 DTD. 31/10/2012. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE DTD. 22/01/2011. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION SLIP OF ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADHAR ENROLMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: R3(A): COPY OF THE STATEMENT. R3(B): COPY OF THE STATEMENT. R3(C): COPY OF THE STATEMENT. R3(D): COPY OF THE STATEMENT. R3(E): COPY OF THE STATEMENT. Kss ..2/- ..2.... WPC.NO.782/2013 (W) R3(F): COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 7/11/2012. R3(G): COPY OF THE RATION CARD. R3(H): COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 8/07/2011. R3(I): COPY OF THE REPORT DTD. 3/12/2012. R3(J): COPY OF THE ORDER
DTD. 11/10/2010 OF JFCM, KANJIRAPPALLY. R3(K): COPY OF THE ORDER
DTD. 3/10/2012 OF JFCM, KANJIRAPPALLY. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
--------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2013
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to be a permanent resident of House No. X/19 of the third respondent Panchayat. The petitioner challenges the action of the third respondent in not issuing a residential certificate to her. According to the petitioner, she is working as a Sub Engineer of the Kerala State Electricity Board in Kozhikode District. She is also residing at the said place in connection with her job but maintains that the same is only her temporary residence. On 04.10.2012, she submitted an application, online, for the inclusion of her name in the electoral rolls for the Poonjar Assembly Constituency. On her appearance, the Electoral Registration Officer who is the Tahsildar, Kanjirappilly required the petitioner to produce a residential certificate from the third respondent Panchayat. It was in the above circumstances that she had submitted Exhibit P1 -:2:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W application. As per Exhibit P2, the petitioner's application has been rejected.
2. According to Advocate Jojo A.V., the counsel for the petitioner, the Secretary of the third respondent Panchayat is related to the petitioner's sister-in-law, Smt. Sushama and has rejected her application for residential certificate, out of personal animosity and ill will. Reliance is placed on Exhibit P3 certificate issued by the Village Officer, the petitioner's driving license Exhibit P4 and her Secondary School Leaving Certificate Exhibit P5 to contend that she is permanently residing at Kappliyil house, Mundakayam. Though she had submitted Exhibit P6 to the second respondent complaining of the action of the Secretary of the Panchayat, according to her no action has been taken thereon, till date.
3. Separate counter affidavits have been filed by second as well as the third respondents. According to the second respondent, the petitioner's complaint had been -:3:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W considered by the said authority, after obtaining a report from the Secretary of the Panchayat. As per the report of the Secretary, the petitioner is married and is working as an Assistant Engineer of the Kerala State Electricity Board at Peruvannamoozhy in Kozhikode District. She has been residing there for the past twenty years. It is also stated that the petitioner's name is not included in the Ration Card. It is further stated that the second respondent had conducted a visit of the place for the purpose of ascertaining the veracity of the petitioner's claim. Statements were obtained from the petitioner's mother as well as sister-in-law. According to the said persons as well as the neighbours, the petitioner is not residing at the said address.
4. The third respondent has filed a separate counter affidavit producing Exhibit R3(a) statement given by the petitioner's sister-in-law Smt. Sushama, Exhibit R3(b) statement given by the petitioner's mother, Exhibit R3(c) -:4:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W and Exhibit R3(d) statements given by two neighbours and Exhibit R3(e) statements of the Ward Member. All the above statements are to the effect that the petitioner is not a permanent resident of the address, as claimed by her. Exhibit R3(g), copy of the Ration Card that relates to the Kappliyil House does not show the name of the petitioner. For the above reasons, it is contended that the petitioner's request has been rejected for valid reasons. It is also pointed out that the petitioner's sister-in-law, Smt. Sushama and her husband Sri.Ramesh Babu are not on good terms. Sri.Ramesh Babu, who is a Police Officer has been restrained by Exhibit R3(j) and R3(k) orders passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Kanjirappilly under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It is only to prevent Smt. Sushama from deriving the benefits of the said prohibitory orders that the petitioner's present application for residential certificate has been submitted, according to the third respondent. -:5:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W5 A reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner refuting the allegations made in the counter affidavit. Exhibit P10 Community Certificate issued to the petitioner as well as the Registration Slip of her daughter issued by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences and copy of her Adhar Card are pressed into service to contend that the petitioner is a permanent resident at the Kappliyil house as claimed by her. Therefore, it is contended that the Panchayat has erred in rejecting her application.
6. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is residing at Kozhikode only in connection with her employment. Her permanent residence continues to be at Mundakayam, which status she has not forgone, till date. Therefore, it is contended that she is entitled to a residential certificate as sought for.
7. Advocate C.S.Manilal, counsel for the third respondent, on the other hand points out that the application for residential certificate has been submitted -:6:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W only in the context of the strained relationship between Smt.Sushama and her husband Sri.Ramesh Babu, who is the brother of the petitioner. Exhibits R3(j) and R3(k) protection orders have been passed in favour of the sister- in-law of the petitioner. The present attempt of the petitioner is only to set at naught the effect of the said lawful orders. Therefore, the application has been rightly rejected by the third respondent.
8. The learned Government Pleader also supports the contentions of the third respondent. It is pointed out that the petitioner is already married and is permanently residing with her husband, elsewhere, even if her address at the KSEB quarters is considered to be only a temporary one for the purpose of her job.
9. Heard. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is already married. However, the details of her husband are strikingly absent in these proceedings. Even her affidavit has been sworn to, describing herself as the daughter of -:7:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W Narayanan. The context in which the application for residential certificate has been submitted is important, as rightly pointed out by the counsel for the third respondent. It is clear from the prohibitory orders produced as Exhibits R3(j) and Exhibit R3(k) (same as Exhibits P8 and P9), that the marital relations between Sri.Ramesh Babu who is the brother of the petitioner and his wife Smt. Sushama are strained. Exhibits R3(j) prohibitory order has been passed on 11.10.2010. As per Exhibit R3(j), the right of the sister- in- law of the petitioner to reside in her matrimonial house has been protected. However, the said order appears to have been violated by Sri. Ramesh Babu, who is a Police Officer. Therefore, as per Exhibit R3(k), the said person has been restrained from entering House No.21, Ward No.VIII of the Mundakayam Gramapanchayat. The said person is also restrained from creating any obstruction to the petitioner's sister- in-law in taking income from an item of property comprised in Sy.No.318(318/46/A) block No.26 of -:8:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W Erumeli Village. The said order was passed on 31.10.2012. The petitioner's application Exhibit P1 is dated 11.11.2012, about ten days thereafter. It is clear from the sequence of events narrated above that the application submitted by the petitioner cannot be taken merely as an innocent one for the grant of a residential certificate, which she did not require for the past two decades. The report that the second respondent appears to have obtained from the third respondent is to the effect that the petitioner has been residing in Kozhikode District for the past 20 years in connection with her employment.
10. I also notice that an enquiry has been conducted as evident from the statements obtained, produced as Exhibits R3(a) to Exhibit R3(e). Exhibit R3(b) is a statement given by the petitioner's mother herself. Exhibit R3(g) is the copy of the Ration Card of House No.21 in Ward No.VIII of Mundakayam Grama Panchayat. The above documents do not show the petitioner's name. Therefore, it is clear -:9:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W that the petitioner is not a permanent resident of the house, as asserted by her. It is no doubt true that the petitioner was born in the said house and was also probably brought up there. However, she has subsequently got an employment, got married and has been residing in Kozhikode District. The statements of the neighbours show that she had been visiting her parental house, during holidays and on other occasions. Such visits cannot entitle the petitioner to the issue of a residential certificate. Nor does it entitle her to claim for the inclusion of her name in the electoral rolls. I find that the impugned order has been passed after making a proper enquiry. The present attempt in all probability is motivated by the strained marital relationship between her brother and his wife. The said persons are also not parties to this writ petition. If the petitioner has any other civil rights in respect of the property, they would have to be established in appropriate civil proceedings that she may institute. Regarding the -:10:- W.P.(C) No.782 of 2013-W personal allegation against the third respondent, I find no materials to support the same. The counter affidavit of the second respondent shows that the second respondent had personally visited the place and ascertained the correctness of the statements made by the Secretary of the Panchayat. For the above reasons, this writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE kkj