Kerala High Court
Subash Kumar.K vs Chandran.N.M on 16 November, 2019
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
SATURDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1941
WP(C).No.15747 OF 2019(P)
PETITIONER/S:
SUBASH KUMAR.K, AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. KUMARAN, INDEEVARAM HOSUE,
P.O. AROOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY
HOLDER RAJAN N.P., S/O CHOYI,
INDEEVARAM HOUSE, PO AROOR,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 CHANDRAN.N.M, S/O. POKKAN, CHERUVATTU POYIL,
P.O KURINJALIYODE KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 542.
2 KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
DISTRICT OFFICE, KOZHIKODE, REP. ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEER, 3RD FLOOR, ZAMORINS SQUARE,
LINK ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 002.
3 THE PURAMERI GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O PURAMERI,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 503.
4 THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, S
UB DIVISION OFFICE, VADAKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 011.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.PROMODH KUMAR
R1 BY ADV. SMT.MAYA CHANDRAN
R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMMED
R3 BY ADV. SRI.THOUFEEK AHAMED
SC. KSEB. SRI. A. ARUNKUMAR,
SC. PCB. SRI. T. NAVEEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 15747/19
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that the 1st respondent is conducting a Furniture Manufacturing Unit under the name and style 'Malabar Interiors' from the year 2007 without obtaining the necessary Consent to Operate from the Pollution Control Board and such other necessary consents and permissions from the competent Statutory Authorities. He alleges that operation of the 1st respondent's Unit is causing unbearable nuisance and therefore, that this Court direct the 3rd respondent-Purameri Grama Panchayath to immediately intervene to close down the said Unit.
2. I see from the materials and pleadings on record that, noticing the afore allegations, a learned Judge of this Court had issued an order dated 10.06.2019 directing the Environmental Engineer of the Pollution Control WPC 15747/19 3 Board, Kozhikode, to depute an Officer to inspect the Unit of the 1st respondent; and am today told by the learned Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board-Sri.T.Naveen-that this has been done and a subsequent inspection has also been done, wherein it was found that the pollution fighting mechanisms of the Unit were deficient. He says that instructions were, therefore, given to the 1st respondent to create a proper enclosure using bricks and that it has now been seen that such works have been completed by him. He adds that the competent Authorities of the Pollution Control Board will inspect the premises again and find out if all necessary pollution fighting mechanisms have been put in place and that, thereafter, they will consider the 1st respondents application for Consent to Operate and issue orders thereon.
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd WPC 15747/19 4 respondent-Grama Panchayath, Sri.P.A.Ahammed, submits that he is not sure if any Trade Licence has been issued to the 1st respondent but that the Panchayath will ensure that the said respondent operates his Unit only in terms of law and on the strength of all applicable consents and permissions. He adds that the Panchayath is willing to abide by all the directions that may be issued by this Court in this Writ Petition.
4. When I consider the afore submissions, it is without doubt that the 1st respondent is operating his Unit without the Consent to Operate being obtained from the Pollution Control Board, though I am aware that the contention of the said respondent is that he has been operating the Unit for the last more than 12 years without any objections being raised against him. However, since, the learned Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control WPC 15747/19 5 Board submits that the application for Consent to Operate of the 1st respondent is under process, I am certainly of the view that the said Authority must complete it at the earliest.
Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the Pollution Control Board to hear the petitioner as well as the 1st respondent on 20.11.2019 at 11 a.m.; on which day, both of them will remain present before it and then decide finally on the application for Consent to Operate made by the 1st respondent.
If the resultant order is in favour of the 1st respondent, he will be at liberty to produce the same before the Secretary of the Panchayath, who will, thereupon, consider his application for Trade Licence, if any, and issue appropriate orders thereon.
Even though normally, the 1st respondent could not have been allowed to continue to WPC 15747/19 6 operate his Unit in the absence of a Trade Licence, I deem it appropriate to give him a 'breathing time' and permit him to do so, subject to his compliance with all the directions of the Pollution Control Board, for a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; however, clarifying that within this period if he is unable to obtain the Consent to Operate or the Trade Licence, then he will shut down the Unit until they are obtained by him; and the Secretary of the 3rd respondent-Grama Panchayath will ensure that these directions are complied with implicitly.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
RR JUDGE
WPC 15747/19
7
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY FO THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
DATED 30.6.2009 FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 30.5.2007 ALONG WITH THE CONDITIONS. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE D&O LICENCE ISSUED TO THE IST RESPONDENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 21.8.2017.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTEGRATED CONSENT TO OPERATE-RENEWAL ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.5.16.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 3.11.2018.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 7.11.2018.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 3.11.2018.
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 29.3.2019 AND COMMUNICATION BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.2.2019. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 20.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.
EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26.11.2018 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER AND THE PLAN.