Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Kerala High Court

S.Akbar vs State Of Kerala on 14 February, 2007

Author: Kurian Joseph

Bench: Kurian Joseph

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 33442 of 2002(F)


1. S.AKBAR, 5/427, SAHARA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. PUTHUSSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE

4. PARAGON STEELS PVT.LTD., REPRESENTED BY

5. CENTRAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER

                For Respondent  :SRI.V.GIRI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

 Dated :14/02/2007

 O R D E R
                               KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

                         -----------------------------------------

                              O.P.No. 33442 of  2002

                         -----------------------------------------

                Dated this the 14th   day of  February, 2007


                                    JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers:-

(a) Call for the records of the case leading to Ext.P7 and P8 and quash the same by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order.

(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 not to issue any licence to the 4th respondent steel melting unit being set up in the residential area of Puthussery Panchayat in violation of the norms laid down by the Pollution Control Board and the statutory provisions contained in the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories Licensing) Rules 1996.

Learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that during the pendency of the writ petition sanction has already been given and the factory was set up. According to the petitioner the consent given was cancelled as per Ext.P10. Be that as it may, in view of the intervening developments referred to in the counter affidavit, in case the 4th respondent is functioning without proper clearance from the Pollution Control Board, it will be open to the petitioner to point out the same  OP NO.33442/2002 -:2:- before respondents 2, 3 and 5 in which case appropriate action in accordance with law will be taken with notice to the petitioner and the 4th respondent within another three months.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) ahg.

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

JUDGMENT 14th February, 2007