IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 10784 of 2007(H)
1. RAJEEV.R.KAMATH,S/O.KAMATH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. PAYIPPARA PANCHYATH REP.BY ITS SECRETARY
3. DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HEALTH),
4. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
5. K.M.KAMALUDDIN,PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE,
For Petitioner :SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :28/03/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J.
----------------------------------
W.P.(C)NO. 10784 of 2007
----------------------------------
Dated this 28th day of March, 2007
JUDGMENT
The learned Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of
the 3rd respondent. Sri.M.K.Chandramohan Das, the learned
Standing Counsel, takes notice on behalf of the 4th respondent. In
the nature of the orders, which are being passed hereunder, I am
of the view that notice need not be issued to the other
respondents including party respondent No. 5.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that ignoring Ext.P5
representation submitted before the Panchayat by him, the
Panchayat is now going to issue licence to the 5th respondent for
conduct of crusher unit which will result in serious health hazard
to himself and to the other neighbours. His further grievance is
that the 3rd respondent DMO is about to issue no objection
certificate in respect of the proposed crusher unit without
considering Ext.P5 objection which has been submitted by the
WPC No 2
petitioner before the DMO.
The writ petition will stand dispose of, in view of the
submissions addressed before me by Sri.Dinesh Mathew
J.Murikan, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
Smt.T.B.Ramani, the learned Government Pleader and
Sri.Chandramohan Das, the learned Standing Counsel for the
Pollution Control Board, issuing following directions:
If the 3rd respondent DMO has not so far issued no
objection certificate in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of
crusher unit, which is proposed to be installed by him in Sy. Nos.
880/8/1 and 880/8/2 of Ward No. VII, the DMO will hear the
petitioner on his complaint Ext.P5 before taking any decision as
to issuance of the non objection certificate, which is sought for
by the 5th respondent. Similarly, the 2nd respondent Panchayat
will hear the petitioner also before taking a final decision on the
licence application submitted by the 5th respondent, if final
decision is not already taken.
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Judge
dpk