IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1496 of 2007(C)
1. KUMARI, W/O.RAJAN, AGED 41 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. OUSEPH, S/O.VARKEY,
3. UMA SEKHARAN, W/O.LATE SEKHARAN,
4. GOPINATHAN, S/O.KONNAN,
5. P.P.BABY, PANDIYAM KATTAYIL HOUSE,
6. K.M.RAJAN, S/O.MADHAVAN,
Vs
1. KRISHNA KURUP, S/O.AYYAPPAN MARAR,
... Respondent
2. THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
4. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,
5. THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF
6. THE PANANCHERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
7. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
For Petitioner :SRI.JIJO PAUL
For Respondent :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :23/03/2009
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
======================
W.P.(C) No.1496 of 2007
======================
Dated, this the 23rd day of March, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have approached this Court mainly to
restrain the first respondent from operating the
Quarry/Crusher unit in the property in question, since it is
situated within the prohibited distance, particularly when
the first respondent is stated as running the Unit quite
illegally, without obtaining the necessary licence provided
under the relevant provisions of law.
2. Earlier, taking note of the counter affidavit filed
by the official respondents, it was observed by this Court,
on 30.3.2007, that the concerned authorities have not
issued any licence to the first respondent and in the said
circumstances, this Court had passed an interim order
staying the work in the Quarry run by the first respondent.
Despite having entered appearance, the first respondent
has not chosen to file any counter affidavit, nor has he
produced the licence, if any, issued by the authorities under
W.P.(C) No. 1496/2007 -:2:-
the Explosives Act and Rules; the ‘consent to establish’ and
‘consent to operate’ given by the Pollution Control Board;
the licence issued by the concerned local authority etc. It is
also pertinent to note that the first respondent has not come
forward seeking to review the interim order passed above
two years ago. It is pointed out by the learned Senior
Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents
that the Quarry is not in operation as on this date.
3. In the above facts and circumstances, the interim
order passed by this Court on 30-3-2007 is made absolute.
It is declared that the first respondent cannot operate the
Quarry/Crusher Unit in so far as he has not acquired the
necessary licence contemplated under the relevant
provisions of law.
The writ petition is allowed as above.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
skr