C ABDUL RAHIMAN ALIAS ADRAMAN KUTTY Vs. SECRETARY KARUVATTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH KARUVATTOOR GRAMAPANCHAYATH KARUVATTOOR KOZHIKODE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, who was granted a license for conducting cement business upto 1.3.2011, applied for its renewal. It is stated that orders were not passed by the Panchayat as a result of which, a deemed licence, as contemplated under Section 236 (3) of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act, 1994, accrued in his favour upto 31.3.2011.

(2.) THEREFORE, Ext.P4 notice was issued by the Panchayat on 23.5.2011 calling upon the petitioner to close down the cement business mainly on the ground of pollution and the nuisance that was caused to the people in the neighbourhood. His appeal to the Committee was rejected and he filed a revision to the Tribunal. In the revision, initially the Tribunal passed Ext.P5 order of stay of Ext.P4. However, after hearing the parties, the Tribunal finally rejected the revision by Ext.P6 order. It is challenging Ext.P6 order, the writ petition has been filed. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the revision was rejected by the Tribunal without adverting to the contentions and the remedial action that has already been taken by the petitioner. It is also stated that, as at present there is no pollution caused, requiring closure of the business.

(3.) NEEDLESS to say that it will still be open to the petitioner to satisfy the statutory requirements and apply for licence, in which event, untrammelled by the findings in this judgment, the application will be dealt with. With the above clarification, the writ petition is dismissed.