OMANA GOPINATHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.13100/2021 (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner'), has approached this Court aggrieved by the memo issued by the second respondent - Secretary of the Panchayat requiring the petitioner to stop the functioning of a poultry farm being conducted by her. W.P.(C) No.12962/2021 is filed by the neighbouring owner alleging illegal conduct of poultry farm. He is the additional 4th respondent in W.P.(C) No.13100/2021 (hereinafter referred to as 'the additional 4th respondent').

(2.) Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) No.13100/2021 is the consent issued by the Pollution Control Board to establish a poultry farm. The validity of Ext.P2 consent was up to 21.03.2019. As per Ext.P6, the consent has been renewed and extended up to 28.02.2026. Admittedly the petitioner does not possess a licence from the Panchayat. Though he had submitted an application for licence, as evidenced by Ext.P7 communication issued by the Secretary, the application was defective for non-compliance of various requirements. As evidenced by Exts.P11 and P12, a fresh application has been submitted by the petitioner on 28.06.2021, seeking issuance of licence. The same is pending consideration.

(3.) The additional 4th respondent-petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12962/2021 contends that, the conduct of poultry farm in the property in question, which is situated adjacent to his property, is illegal and is causing nuisance and health hazards to the petitioner and his family.