Varghese vs A.R.Ramakrishnan on 9 January, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 35740 of 2007(D)


1. VARGHESE, AGED 65 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. A.R.RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O.RAMAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. A.R.ARUNKUMAR, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN,

3. MALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED

4. THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.N.MANOJ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :09/01/2008

 O R D E R
                        PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
               -----------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C)No.35740 OF 2007-D
               -----------------------------------------------
                 DATED THIS THE 9TH JANUARY, 2008

                            J U D G M E N T

Having regard to the submissions addressed at the Bar by

counsel appearing on both sides, I am of the view that it will suffice

if the Panchayath is directed to take a decision on the application for

building permit submitted by the additional 5th respondent (application

referred to in Ext.R5(g)) with notice to all the parties. There is

controversy between the parties as to whether a licence under Rule

12 of the Licensing of Dangerous and Offensive Trade Rules is

necessary for construction of the Liquified Petroleum Gas dispensing

station unit which is proposed by the additional 5th respondent. The

petitioner asserts that such licence is absolutely necessary. According

to the additional 5th respondent, such a licence is not necessary. The

Panchayath will decide this question also while taking decision on

Ext.R5(g).

2. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of issuing the following

directions:

i) The third respondent Panchayath will take up the application

submitted by the additional 5th respondent for permit (Application

referred to in Ext.R5(g) immediately, hear the petitioner, additional 5th

WP(C)No.35740/2007.

-2-

respondent(the applicant), respondents 1 and 2 also and take a

correct decision . The decision as directed above will be taken at the

earliest, at any rate within six weeks of receiving a copy of this

judgment. If the Panchayath finds that licence under Rule 12 of the

Licensing of Dangerous and Offensive Trade Rules is also necessary,

the Panchayath shall direct the petitioner to apply for licence and in

that context before granting licence the Panchayath shall obtain a

report from the 4th respondent.

(PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)

ks.

WP(C)No.35740/2007.

-3-