PAUL GEORGE Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the functioning of a manufacturing unit established by the sixth respondent wherein certain process have been undertaken while producing M sand. What is projected by the petitioner is that the process undertaken by the sixth respondent is creating water and air pollution.

(2.) IN the counter affidavit filed by the sixth respondent, various documents have been produced as Exts.R6(a) to R6(e). Ext.R6(a) is the copy of the licence issued by the Malayatoor - Neeleeswaram Grama Panchayat dated 14.5.2012. Ext.R6(b) is the copy of the consent issued by the Pollution Control Board dated 20.9.2012. Ext.R6(c) is the copy of the dealer's licence issued by the Geologist under Rule 48C of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Ext.R6(d) is the copy of the certificate of registration obtained under the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules and Ext.R6 (e) is the copy of the registration certificate issued by the Department of Industries.

(3.) AS regards the allegation that the unit will cause pollution, learned counsel for the sixth respondent submitted that already inspections have been conducted by the Pollution Control Board. The sixth respondent will be fulfilling all the conditions insisted by the Pollution Control Board.