High Court Kerala High Court

John P.Varghese @ Vincent vs Udumbannoor Grama Panchayath on 17 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
John P.Varghese @ Vincent vs Udumbannoor Grama Panchayath on 17 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18073 of 2008(B)


1. JOHN P.VARGHESE @ VINCENT,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. UDUMBANNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. HEALTH INSPECTOR,

3. ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :17/06/2008

 O R D E R
                          ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                        ===============
        W.P.(C) Nos.18073, 18078, 18121 & 18135 OF 2008
       =================================

                Dated this the 17th day of June, 2008


                             J U D G M E N T

The challenge in these writ petitions is against Ext.P5 orders passed

by the Secretary of the 1st respondent Panchayat rejecting the applications

made by the respective Petitioners for licence for the continued conduct of

the poultry farms run by them. According to the learned counsel for the

petitioners, the reason stated in the order rejecting their applications is

only the unfounded apprehension of the ill effects of the poultry farm.

Counsel submits that the poultry farms are having necessary consent from

the Pollution Control Board, NOC by Health Inspector and also on health

card issued by the Panchayat itself.

2. In my view a decision of the claim raised by the Petitioners

certainly requires appreciation of the surrounding circumstances and also

the effect of the orders referred to above. This can be effectively done by

the Appellate Authority as provided under the Panchayat Raj Act itself.

Therefore, it is for the petitioners to pursue the matter before the

appropriate authority and with that liberty, I close the writ petitions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that if Ext.P5

order is to be implemented immediately, their running establishments will

WPC 18073, 18078, 18121 & 18135/08

:2 :

have to be closed down. Taking into account the submissions, I direct that

further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5 be deferred for a period of 4 weeks

from today and in the meantime, petitioners shall pursue the statutory

remedies and obtain appropriate orders including interim orders for

safeguarding their interest.

Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment before the

respondent Panchayat for compliance.

Writ petitions are disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE
Rp