IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 441 of 2009()
1. K.G. MATHEW, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. LATE
... Petitioner
2. P. MATHAI, AGED 69 YEARS,
3. K.A. NINAN, AGED 71, S/O. LATE
4. K.A. KOSHY, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. LATE
5. C.A. SAMUEL AGED 73 YEARS,
6. PONNAMMA AGED 40 YEARS, D/O. LATE
7. SARAMMA EASWAR AGED 58 YEARS,
8. JINU DAS, AGED 32 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA
3. THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL
4. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER,
5. THE ENVIRONEMENTAL ENGINEER,
6. DISTRICT PANCHAYATH PATHANAMTHITTA,
7. KOZHENCHERRY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS
For Respondent :SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM
The Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice MR.J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :25/02/2009
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY, Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J.
--------------------------------------
W.A.No.441 of 2009
-------------------------------------
Dated 25th February, 2009
JUDGMENT
Koshy, Ag.C.J.
Panchayat is proposing to construct a waste treatment
plant. It is submitted that it is only 15 cents of land in the water
logged area near pampa river. Pending writ petition, Ext.R7(g)
consent was given by the Pollution Control Board. Learned single
Judge even though originally granted stay, after issuance of the
consent, by the impugned order directed that construction may
continue strictly complying with the conditions in the consent issued
by the Pollution Control Board. It is submitted by the appellants that
they filed an appeal against the consent order, but, that is not being
proceeded with as original order was not issued to them. In the
above circumstances, if copy of the order (Ext.R7(g)) is produced by
the appellants before the appellate authority, appeal should be heard
without delay on merit with notice to interested parties. Appellants
can produce a copy of this judgment before the appellate authority for
compliance. If appellants produce a copy of the consent order and
stay petition within 10 days from today before the appellate authority,
it should be considered and orders should be passed within three
W.A.441/2009 2
weeks from today. Since the construction of the waste treatment
plant can be made only after inviting public tenders and complying
with the procedural requirements and there is no order allowing them
to operate the waste treatment plant, no further orders are necessary.
It is contended that in earlier inspection report it was reported by the
very same environmental engineer that the area is not suitable for
establishment of the solid waste treatment plant. The appellants can
press this matter before the appellate authority. Appellants also may
pray for an early hearing of the writ petition.
The writ appeal is disposed of with the above
observations.
J.B.KOSHY
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
V.GIRI
JUDGE
tks