Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

E.C.Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 15 January, 2016

Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar

Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT:

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

    THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/17TH BHADRA, 1938

                  WP(C).No. 30042 of 2016 (E)
                  ----------------------------


PETITIONER:
-----------

           E.C.THOMAS, PROPRIETOR,
           M/S.CHAKRA TRADINGS,
           ELAVANTHINGAL HOUSE, MURINGOOR PO,
           THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680316.


            BY BY SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SENIOR ADVOCATE)
               ADVS.SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY
                   SMT.SANJANA R.NAIR
                   SMT.V.SREEJA

RESPONDENT(S):
--------------

     1.    STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
           THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
           REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

     2.    DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
           COLLECTORATE, KANNUR DISTRICT.

     3.    ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
           COLLECTORATE, KANNUR DISTRICT, KANNUR.

     4.    PERAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
           PERAVOOR PO, KANNUR DISTRICT,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY


            R1 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA


       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
       ON  08-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
       FOLLOWING:
mbr/

WP(C).No. 30042 of 2016 (E)
---------------------------

                            APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-----------------------

EXHIBIT P1 :    TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.01.2016
                ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 :     TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
                DATED FEBRUARY 2016.

EXHIBIT P3 :     TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2016
                (RELEVANT PORTION) ISSUED BY PESO WITH REGARD
                TO APPLICATION  NO.A/E/SC/KL/21/269 (E90960).

EXHIBIT P4 :     TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2016
                (RELEVANT PORTION) ISSUED BY PESO WITH REGARD TO
                APPLICATION NO.A/E/SC/KL/21/270/(E90962).

EXHIBIT P5 :     TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.03.2016 IN
                PURSUANCE OF APPROVAL NO.A./E/SC/KL/21/269
                (E90960).

EXHIBIT P6 :     TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.03.2016 IN
                PURSUANCE OF APPROVAL NO.A./E/SC/KL/21/270
                (E90962).

EXHIBIT P7 :     TRUE COPY OF THE PANCHAYATH RESOLUTION VIDE
                DECISION NO. 98 DATED 18.08.2016.

EXHIBIT P8 :     TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.06.2016 IN
                WPC.NO. 1794/2016.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:         NIL
-----------------------
                                            //TRUE COPY//


                                            P.S. TO JUDGE


mbr/



                      P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

                  = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                  WP.(C).No.30042 of 2016-E.

                  = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

            Dated this the 8th day of September, 2016.

                          J U D G M E N T

Exts.P5 and P6 are the applications preferred by the petitioner for grant of No Objection Certificate under Rule 103 of the Explosives Rules, 2008. The grievance of the petitioner is that in the light of Ext.P7 decision taken by the concerned Grama Panchayat, the said applications are not being considered. The limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, when this matter was taken up for admission, is for a direction to the second respondent to consider Exts.P5 and P6 applications untrammelled by Ext.P7 decision of the Grama Panchayat.

2. A similar matter was dealt with by this Court in Ext.P8 judgment. In Ext.P8 judgment, this Court had explained the procedure to be followed while dealing with applications under Rule 103 of the Explosives Rules, 2008.

In the circumstances, I deem it appropriate to dispose WP.(C).No.30042/2016-E. 2 of the writ petition directing the second respondent to consider Exts.P5 and P6 applications in the light of Ext.P8 judgment of this Court, untrammelled by Ext.P7 decision of the Grama Panchayat, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the second respondent for compliance.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

Kvs/-

// true copy //