Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

E.P.Muhammed

High Court Of Kerala|23 October, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
“(i) To call for the records relating to Exts.P1 to P13 and to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing and commanding the 1st respondent to issue permission/license to the petitioner, forthwith, for establishing and operating the industrial unit namely M/s. Even shine Powder Coatings pursuant to Exhibit P11 and P12 deemed license by the Single Window Clearance Board.
(ii) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the petitioner is entitled to establish and run the industrial unit in the light of Exhibit P11 and P12 deemed licenses, the clearance/NOC granted by the competent authorities and also acceptance of Exhibit P13 license fee.
(iii) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to grant permit and license forthwith, if the petitioner has complied the statutory formalities as per the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act and the Rules made there under.
(iv) To issue an order of interim direction to the 1st Respondent to grant building permit to the petitioner, forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition (Civil).
(v) To issue any other appropriate writ, direction or order to meet out justice in the facts and circumstances of this case.”
2. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the callous inaction on the part of the respondent Panchayath in granting necessary D&O licence, merely with reference to some objections raised from the neighbours with vested interest, stating that there is a chance for pollution.
3. The sequence of events narrated in the writ petition shows that, the petitioner wanted to establish a powder coating unit under the name and style 'M/s. Even shine Powder Coatings' in his property, for which Ext.P1 clearance was given by the District Industries Centre on 27.11.2012. It is stated that, the petitioner has obtained all the requisite licenses/clearance as borne by Ext.P2 NOC issued by the Fire Department, Ext.P3 NOC issued by the Kunnathunadu Grama Panchayat, Ext.P4 NOC issued by the District Medical Officer and Ext.P5 approval of the building lay out by the Town Planner. Subsequently, the petitioner was served with Ext.P7 issued by the Kunnathunadu Grama Panchayat on 27.11.2012, seeking to stall the setting up of the unit, referring to the chance for pollution, based on the complaint as aforesaid. This made the petitioner to approach the Pollution Control Board, who granted Ext.P8 'consent to establish' on 30.01.2013, making it clear that, the petitioner has to obtain necessary 'consent to operate' for running the unit. The de facto complainant has approached the Civil Court against the petitioner by filing O.S. No.42 of 2013 before the Munsiff's Court, Perumbavoor. The interim order already granted was vacated as per Ext.P9 dated 02.09.2013 and subsequently, the suit itself was dismissed. It is stated that no appeal is pending. While so, because of the delay on the part of the Panchayat in issuing necessary D&O licence under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Rules, the petitioner approached the competent authority under the 'Single Window Clearance System'. Ext.P11 is the proceedings of the General Manager, District Industries Centre dated 30.11.2013 and Ext.P12 certificate is issued by the competent authority of the concerned Department of the Government. Despite producing all these materials before the respondent Panchayat, Ext.P7 has not been varied so far, and the delay is causing irreparable loss and hardships to the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that, the course and proceedings pursued by the respondent Panchayat is per se arbitrary and illegal in all respects. Reference is also made to Ext.P13 receipt, whereby the Panchayat collected the 'permit fee' for construction of the building of the petitioner. It is also stated that, by virtue of the deemed licence, no further licence is necessary. But, still it is because of the bonafides on the part of the petitioner, that the petitioner has approached the Panchayat for issuing a proper D&O licence.
5. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on the last occasion, it was sought to ascertain whether the area concerned is a notified area under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Rules, making it obligation to obtain the D&O licence. Instruction is still to come. Despite the completion of service of notice to the Panchayat, no Counter Affidavit has been filed so far. But the learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat submits that, in view of the 'deemed licence' obtained by the petitioner as borne by Exts.P11 and P12, no further licence is necessary. The submission is recorded.
6. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to establish the industrial unit on the strength of Ext.P8 'consent to establish' given by the Pollution Control Board and Exts.P11/P12 deemed licence obtained under the 'Single Window Clearance System'. After setting up the unit, necessary 'consent to operate' shall be obtained from the Pollution Control Board and the petitioner shall comply with all the conditions/stipulations issued from the competent authorities for running the unit.
The matter stands disposed of accordingly.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

E.P.Muhammed

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
23 October, 2014
Judges
  • P R Ramachandra Menon
Advocates
  • C A Navas Sri
  • T K Sasikumar
  • Sri Roy Varghese
  • Smt
  • C S Simi