The complaint of the petitioner is regarding a cement godown that is functioning close to his residential property. The petitioner has informed respondents 3 and 4 of the nuisance that is caused by the godown. He complains that no action is taken on his complaint by the said respondents.
2. Adv.Sri.Sunil Nair Palakkat appears for respondents 3 and 4.
According to the counsel, no licence has been issued to the cement godown. In the light of the above submission, the counsel for the petitioner limits his relief to afford an opportunity of being heard before any licence is issued to the 5th respondent.
3. In view of the limited relief sought, it is sufficient that this writ petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the other respondents. This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing the 4th respondent to consider the complaints made by the petitioner, to afford an opportunity of being heard to him as well as the 5th respondent and to pass appropriate orders on the complaints as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks.
The application for licence submitted by the 5th respondent shall be considered only thereafter.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV