Madras High Court
R.Kala vs The Executive Officer on 26 June, 2014
Author: R.Subbiah
Bench: R.Subbiah
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.06.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.(MD)No.1729 of 2014 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 3 of 2014 R.Kala ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Executive Officer, Killiyoor Town Panchayat, Killiyoor, Kanyakumari District. 2.The Block Health (Sanitary) Supervisor, Killiyoor Block Office, Kanyakumari District. 3.The Deputy Director of Health & Sanitation Service, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari. 4.Vincent 5.Gnanaiyan 6.S.Thangaiyan 7.Anbaiyan 8.James 9.Shibi 10.Justine George Kumar ... Respondents RR 4 to 10 impleaded as per order of Court dated 04.06.2014 in M.P. (MD) No.2 of 2014. Prayer Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.383/13 dated 09.01.2014 and also Na.Ka.No.382/13 dated 16.12.2013 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the smooth running of the petitioner's piggery farm. !For Petitioner ... Mr.F.Deepak ^For Respondents ... Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss 1 to 3 Government Advocate For Respondents ... Mr.L.Plasto Aritatil 4 to 10 :ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.383/13 dated 09.01.2014 and also Na.Ka.No.382/13 dated 16.12.2013 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the smooth running of the petitioner's Piggery Farm.
2. In the affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner is a graduate. She has completed her B.Sc., B.Ed., Agriculture. She registered her name with the District Industrial Centre, Department of Industries and Commerce, Government of Tamilnadu. After her graduation and after registering her name, in spite of her best efforts, she could not get any suitable employment. Hence, in order to eke out her livelihood and with an intention to start a business, she applied for permission to the Department of Industries and Commerce for grant of permission to run a Piggery Farm. She made necessary arrangement for construction of necessary buildings and Farm and to keep the premises hygienic by maintaining the norms of Health Department. She has also made necessary arrangements for the free flow of the waste material and the same is used for Bio-Gas. The Government of Tamilnadu has permitted her to establish the same under the Government of Tamilnadu, Department of Industries and Commerce under the Enterprises Memorandum No.2012/33/030/ 05905/RRMP/E. The Farm comes under the category of Micro Unit, where it is termed as an Industry and does not require any sanction or licence from any authority. The petitioner has also obtained a loan of Rs.20.00 Lakhs from the Indian Overseas Bank, Mangarai Branch in her name. She also availed another loan in the name of her husband from Indian Overseas Bank for establishing the Bio-Gas Plant. She has also constructed a compound wall with hollow bricks of a height of 6.5 feet encircling her Farm and her house in order to see that no inconvenience is caused to any one. In fact there are only two houses situated by the side of the above Farm. Absolutely there is no pollution, bad smell emanates from the Farm and all the waste is being fully utilized through Bio-Gas Plant. While so, some persons inimical towards the growth of her industry and with oblique motives, without any cogent reasons or materials to show that the Farm established by her is causing any pollution etc., have made a complaint to the first respondent and demanded to close the Farm. The first respondent without calling for any explanation and without issuing proper notice as contemplated under the rules has issued orders in his proceedings No.382/13 dated 16.12.2013, demanding her to close the Piggery Farm within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. Further, the respondent has also issued another notice on 09.01.2014, in Na.Ka.No.382/2013, stating that the petitioner should remove the Piggery Farm with immediately effect. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
3. Pending the writ petition, this Court granted interim stay on 03.02.2014. Thereafter, the respondents 4 to 10, who are residing near the Farm filed an application to implead themselves as respondents in M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2014 and the said application was allowed on 04.06.2014.
4. The first respondent has filed a counter stating that on the complaints of the local public around Survey No.63/4 of Paloor Village, Vilavancode Taluk, within the Killiyoor Town Panchayat that bad smell emanates from the hotel wastes and other waste things stagnated for Piggery Farm, the first respondent verified the spot and confirmed the allegations of the local public that there is apprehension of spreading diseases to the local public by the Piggery Farm conducted by the petitioner is true. If the petitioner wants to conduct Piggery Farm, she ought to have obtained building permission from the Town Panchayat. But no such permission was obtained from the Town Panchayat for conducting Piggery farm. The petitioner also ought to have obtained permission to install Bio-Gas Plant from the Pollution Control Board and also from the Health Department. The petitioner did not obtain permission from the Pollution Control Board and Health Department. After making spot verification, the first respondent by order dated 16.12.2013, informed the petitioner to remove the Piggery Farm within 15 days. After confirmation of the allegations of the local public against the petitioner, the Zonal Health (Sanitary) Supervisor, Government Primary Health Centre, Killiyoor, vide Letter dated 08.01.2014 informed to remove the Piggery Farm from the disputed area. Since, the petitioner failed to remove the Piggery Farm, the first respondent by order dated 09.01.2014, informed the petitioner to remove the Piggery Farm within 7 days. Against the said order, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. Only on the ground of safeguarding the local public from the contagious diseases, the first respondent informed the petitioner to remove the Piggery Farm. Hence, they sought for dismissal of the Writ Petition.
5. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is running the Piggery Farm by obtaining permission from the Department of Industries and Commerce and by following the norms fixed by the concerned authorities. In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, invited the attention of this Court to Clause 8.2 of Micro, Small and Medium Industries Policy, 2008 and submitted that the Piggery Farm comes under the Micro, Small and Medium Units and it does not require any sanction or licence from any authority. When that being so, the Executive Officer, Killiyoor Town Panchayat has no right to issue the impugned order.
6. Countering the same, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 to 10, by inviting the attention of this Court to G.O.No.174 Rural Development Department dated 23.08.1996, submitted that as per the said G.O., necessary licence from the 1st respondent Executive Officer to run a Piggery Farm is necessary and if the Executive Officer, Killiyoor Town Panchayat has come to the conclusion that the Piggery Farm is a cause for spreading decease, he can take appropriate action to eradicate pigs. The learned counsel also invited the attention of this Court to Sections 240, 245, 246 and 247 of Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920.
7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 to 10 and also perused the materials available on record.
8. Keeping the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side, I have carefully gone through the entire records.
9. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, no sanction or licence is required for the petitioner to run a piggery Farm and the petitioner is running the same as per the norms fixed by the concerned authorities without causing any health hazards and a complaint was made against the petitioner only out of enmity with the oblique motive to curtail the business of the petitioner. In order to support his contention, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court to Clause 8.2 of Micro, Small and Medium Industries Policy, 2008. But from G.O.No.174 Rural Development Department dated 23.08.1996, I find that for running Piggery Farm, the Licence of Executive Office of Panchayat is necessary. In the instant case, absolutely no such licence was obtained. Further, by the said G.O., the Executive Officer of Panchayat was authorised to initiate action, if he comes to the conclusion that the Piggery Farm create health problem to the public. Therefore, the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that no sanction or licence is necessary from any authority cannot be countenanced. Further, Sections 240, 245, 246 and 247 of Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 empowers the first respondent to take appropriate action with regard to the maintenance of cattle shed and Section 240 specifically says that no person shall keep any animal on his premises so as to be a nuisance or so as to be dangerous. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of the petitioner to get licence from the first respondent as per G.O.No.174 Rural Development Department dated 23.08.1996. But in the instant case, the petitioner has not obtained any such licence. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders passed by the first respondent. Hence, I do not find any compelling circumstances, warranting this Court to interfere with the impugned orders of the first respondent. Therefore, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps. are also dismissed.