High Court Kerala High Court

T.P.Rajan vs State Of Kerala on 7 February, 2011

Kerala High Court
T.P.Rajan vs State Of Kerala on 7 February, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 99 of 2011(J)


1. T.P.RAJAN, S/O.KUTTAYI,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MIDHILI P., W/O.LATE MADHAVAN,
3. P.RAVEENDRAN, S/O.P.RAMAN,
4. AHAMMED MUSTHAFA T.K.,
5. A.P.BALAN, S/O.THAMARAN,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

3. CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE,

4. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,

5. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.THAMPAN THOMAS

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :07/02/2011

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                      ================
                      W.P.(C) NO. 99 OF 2011
                  =====================

           Dated this the 7th day of February, 2011

                            J U D G M E N T

According to the petitioners, they are running carpentry

units. It is their case that, they applied for NOC to the 2nd

respondent and that during the pendency of the applications, they

have been directed not to function the units. It is complaining of

the above, the writ petition has been filed.

2. Learned Government Pleader, who has obtained

instructions in the matter submits that, as far as the first

petitioner is concerned, his application has been considered by

the 2nd respondent on 20/10/2010 and that order on the

application will be communicated to him. In so far as the

remaining petitioners are concerned, it is stated that their

applications are being searched out.

3. It is a fact that, as at present, the establishments of the

petitioners are running units. Therefore, if as stated by the

petitioners, applications have been made and are pending, it is

necessary that orders thereon should be passed and

communicated to them, Therefore, it is directed that, if

WPC No. 99/11
:2 :

applications made by the petitioners have been received and are

pending, those applications will be considered and orders will be

communicated to them and that until then, status quo as on date

will be maintained.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp