JUDGMENT : SHAJI P. CHALY, J. This writ appeal is filed by the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 22552 of 2019 challenging the judgment dated 09.12.2019, whereby the following reliefs sought for by the appellant was declined: 1. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 and issue occupancy certificate and number the building in accordance with the law. 2. Issue appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the petitioner is entitled for deemed occupancy as per the proviso to Rule 25(3) of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. 2. Brief material facts for the disposal of the appeal are as follows: The appellant has secured a building permit from the Kaipamangalam Grama Panchayat, Thrissur District dated 07.05.2010 for construction of a building to conduct an Educational Institution which was renewed twice and valid upto 06.05.2019. Apparently, construction was carried out, partly in a property not included in the building permit. Later, layout approval of the Town Planner was sought and it is evident that on 31.08.2017 as per Ext.P2, approval was granted by the Town Planner. It is also clear that on 15.09.2018, fire NOC was issued and, on 29.09.2018, a completion certificate was submitted by the appellant before the Secretary of the Panchayat in terms of Rule 25 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 (for short 'Rules, 2011) for securing occupancy certificate. However, no action was initiated, consequent to which the appellant has issued a reminder dated 08.03.2019 and the acknowledgment is dated 11.03.2019. Since no action was initiated, appellant approached this Court by filing the writ petition. However, the relief as sought for by the appellant was declined; but certain directions were issued to the Secretary of the Panchayat to take up Ext.P4 application of the appellant and take a decision after affording an opportunity of being heard and if it is found that the property is not included either in the data bank or in the BTR as a paddy, necessary opportunity shall be given to the appellant to approach the competent authorities under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008 for securing necessary orders under the said Act. It was further directed that on production of permission, the Secretary will issue occupancy certificate and number the building in terms of law, without any avoidable delay. It was further directed that on production of permission, the Secretary will issue occupancy certificate and number the building in terms of law, without any avoidable delay. At the same time, it was directed that if the property is not included as a paddy field in the data bank or in the BTR, then the Secretary will issue orders on Ext.P4 as expeditiously as possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Certain other directions are also issued. 3. Fact remains, the relief sought for by the appellant in terms of the second proviso to Rule 25(3) of Rules, 2011, in respect of deemed occupancy certificate was declined. According to the appellant, since the appellant has submitted an application seeking issuance of occupancy certificate along with completion certificate as required in Rule 25 of Rules, 2011 on 29.09.2018, on the expiry of 15 days, the appellant is entitled, as of right, to secure the deemed occupancy certificate. It is also pointed out that there was no established case before the learned single Judge that constructions were carried out by the appellant in a paddy field and merely because construction was carried out partly in a property belonging to the appellant, it would not empower the Secretary of the Panchayat not to issue the occupancy and number the building. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat submitted that the appellant has not made out any case to interfere with the judgment of the learned single Judge, since non-consideration of the application of the appellant for issuance of occupancy was based on the adverse legal circumstances in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Rules, 2011. 5. We have heard counsel on either side and considered the rival submissions made across the Bar. On a reading of the judgment of the learned single Judge, it is quite clear and evident that the learned single Judge has declined the relief of deemed occupancy relying upon Section 236(3) of Act, 1994, which is a general provision regarding licences and permissions. It is also clear that the deeming provision contained under sub-Section 3 thereof is provided in the matter of issuance of licences and permissions. But fact remains, Rule 25 of Rules, 2011 specifically deals with the issuance of occupancy certificate, which reads thus: “25. It is also clear that the deeming provision contained under sub-Section 3 thereof is provided in the matter of issuance of licences and permissions. But fact remains, Rule 25 of Rules, 2011 specifically deals with the issuance of occupancy certificate, which reads thus: “25. Completion certificate, development certificate and occupancy certificate.-(1) Every owner shall, on completion of the development or redevelopment of land or construction or reconstruction or addition or alteration of building, as per the permit issued to him, submit a completion certificate certified and signed by him, to the Secretary in the form in Appendix E: Provided that in the case of buildings, other than residential units up to two floors with total floor area not exceeding 150 sq. metres, the completion certificate shall be certified and signed by the owner and registered Architect or Building Designer or Engineer or Town Planner or Supervisor also as in Appendix F. (2) The Secretary shall, on receipt of the completion certificate and on being satisfied that the development or redevelopment of land has been effected in conformity with the requirements of these rules, issue a development certificate in the form in Appendix G, not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of the completion certificate: Provided that if no such development certificate is received within the said fifteen days, the owner may proceed as if such a development certificate has been duly issued to him. (3) The Secretary shall, on receipt of the completion certificate and on being satisfied that the construction or reconstruction or addition or alteration has been carried out in conformity with the requirements of these rules, issue occupancy certificate in the form in Appendix H: not later than fifteen days from the date of receipt of the completion certificate: Provided that, in case there is deficiency as per these rules in the minimum mandatory open spaces/yards other than the distance stipulated as per Section 220(b) of the Act and Rule 112 of these Rules after completion of the construction, the secretary may allow a tolerance upto 5% of the minimum mandatory open spaces/yards to be provided as per these rules or 25 centimetres whichever is less for the building constructed: Provided also that if no such occupancy certificate is issued within the said fifteen days, the owner may proceed as if such occupancy certificate has been duly issued to him. (4) The owner of a building may if he intends to occupy the building before its completion, apply to the Secretary for that purpose and the Secretary shall, on being satisfied that such occupancy will not in any way endanger life, issue occupancy certificate in respect of the completed part.” 6. Section 25(1) makes it clear, there is a duty cast upon every person, who has secured a building permit, that on completion of the development or redevelopment of land or construction or reconstruction or addition or alteration of building in accordance with the permit issued to him, submit a completion certificate certified and signed by him, to the Secretary in the form of Appendix E. As per the proviso thereto, in the case of buildings other than single residential units upto two floors with total floor area upto 150 square meters, the completion certificate shall be certified and signed by the owner and registered Architect or Building Engineer etc. It is also evident from sub-Rule (3) thereunder that the Secretary, on receipt of the completion certificate, shall on being satisfied that the construction was carried out in accordance with the requirement of Rules, 2011, issue occupancy certificate in the form in Appendix H, not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of the completion certificate. It is an admitted fact that the completion certificate was submitted by the appellant on 29.09.2018, and on 08.03.2019, a reminder was also issued, however no action was initiated. Therefore, in terms of second proviso to sub-Rule (3) of Rule 25, the appellant is deemed to have secured occupancy certificate and therefore, on the deemed occupancy, the appellant is entitled to get the building numbered. 7. Therefore, it is also our considered opinion that no evidence was produced by the Panchayat before the learned single Judge so as to successfully establish that the construction was carried out encroaching into a paddy filed belonging to the appellant. Anyhow, the relief sought for on the basis of the deemed occupancy was declined on the ground that a contention was raised by the learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat that construction is carried out encroaching into other properties other than the one mentioned in the building permit granted to the appellant. We are also convinced that such an action was there on the part of the appellant. We are also convinced that such an action was there on the part of the appellant. But, the question is whether a construction carried out partly in a plot not included in the building permit is illegal or bad? It would easy to answer the said question by referring to a few of the provisions of Act, 1994 and Rules, 2011. 8. Section 235B of Chapter XXI of Act, 1994, dealing with building site and construction or reconstruction of building, read thus: “235 B. Building site and construction or reconstruction of building:--No part of the land shall be used as a site for the construction of a building and no building shall be constructed or re-constructed otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this part and of any rules or bye-laws made under this Act relating to the use of building sites or the construction or reconstruction of buildings.” 9. Section 235N confers power on the Secretary to require alteration in work, which read thus: “235 N. Power of Secretary to require alteration in work.-(1) Where it comes to the notice of the Secretary that, a work – (a) is not in accordance with the plans or specifications approved, or (b) is in contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or any rule, bye-law, order of declaration made thereunder, he may, by notice, require the person for whom such work is done, - (i) to make such alteration as may be specified in the said notice to bring the work in conformity with the plans or specification approved or the provisions so contravened; or (ii) to show cause why such alteration should not be made, within such period as may be specified in the notice: Provided that any construction made in deviation from such approved plan or specifications may not be required to be altered unless it contravenes any specifications or provisions mentioned in this Act or building rules made thereunder. (2) Where such person does not show cause as aforesaid, he shall be bound to make the alterations specified in such notice. (3) Where such person shows sufficient cause as aforesaid, the Secretary shall, by order confirm, modify or cancel the notice issued under sub-section (1).” 10. Rule 10 and clause (xi) thereto of Rules, 2011 deal with 'permit not necessary for certain works', and it read thus: “10. (3) Where such person shows sufficient cause as aforesaid, the Secretary shall, by order confirm, modify or cancel the notice issued under sub-section (1).” 10. Rule 10 and clause (xi) thereto of Rules, 2011 deal with 'permit not necessary for certain works', and it read thus: “10. Permit not necessary for certain works.-Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules no building permit shall be necessary for executing the following works which do not otherwise violate any provisions regarding applicable general building requirements, structural stability and fire safety requirements of the rules, namely:- (xi) Changing the location of the building or construction within the plot;” 11. Therefore, on a conjoint reading of the said provisions, it is quite clear and explicit that merely because a construction is carried out in a plot other than the one included in the building permit, occupancy cannot be declined, if the said conduct of the permit holder is not in violation of the provisions of Act, 1994 and Rules, 2011. Said so, that cannot be a reason at all for declining deemed occupancy and consequential numbering of the building. 12. In our considered view, on a mere contention advanced by learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat that the property in which part construction carried out by the appellant is entered in the basic tax register as paddy field, is not an established circumstance to decline the relief of deemed occupancy to the appellant in accordance with the second proviso to Rule 25(3) of Rules, 2011, since it is a statutory right conferred on the building owner. Therefore, unless and until there is established piece of evidence that the construction is carried out in violation of the building permit and the provisions of Act, 1994 and Rules, 2011, the Secretary of the Panchayat cannot decline the deemed occupancy to the building owner and refuse numbering of the building. 13. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to interfere with the judgment of the learned single Judge and to modify the same in terms of second proviso to Rule 25(3) of Rules, 2011. Accordingly, we direct the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to grant building number, deeming that the occupancy certificate is secured by the appellant in terms of the second proviso to Rule 25(3) of Rules, 2011. Accordingly, we direct the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to grant building number, deeming that the occupancy certificate is secured by the appellant in terms of the second proviso to Rule 25(3) of Rules, 2011. We further make it clear that granting of building number to the appellant in terms of the rules specified above will not disable the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to carry on with the enquiry as is contemplated under Rule 25 of the Rules, 2011 and if ultimately it is found that the property in question is included in the BTR as paddy field, liberty shall be granted to the appellant to approach the statutory authority in terms of Section 27A of Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008, and on production of the order, the building number granted on the basis of the deemed occupancy shall be regularised. Accordingly, writ appeal is allowed in part and the judgment is modified as above.