VINOD MATHEW Vs. ERATTAYAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012 was conducting quarrying operations in a parcel of land situate in Survey No.1/1 of Kalkkonthal Village in Udumbanchola Taluk, Idukki District. The land belongs to the eight respondent in W.P.(C)No.10766 of 2012 who has leased it out to the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012 for conducting quarrying operations. The petitioner was conducting quarrying operation after obtaining the requisite licence/permission from the Kerala State Pollution Control Board, Department of Explosives and the local authority.

(2.) WHILE matters stood thus, the Secretary of Erattayar Grama Panchayat, within whose limits the quarry is situate, issued a notice dated 27.3.2012 calling upon the petitioner to stop the quarrying operations. The petitioner had in the meanwhile submitted an application dated 22.3.2012 for renewal of the licence issued to him under the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996. The petitioner thereupon filed Ext.P8 representation dated 9.4.2012 to the Secretary of the Erattayar Grama Panchayat requesting to withdraw Ext.P7 and to renew the licence issued to him to operate the quarry under the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996. W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012 was thereupon filed challenging Ext.P7 and seeking a direction to the Secretary of Erattayar Grama Panchayat to consider Ext.P8 representation as well as the application for renewal of the licence and pass order thereon at the earliest.

(3.) I heard Sri.M.C.John, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012, Sri.B.Jayasurya, learned standing counsel appearing for the first respondent, Sri.Joseph George, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 and 3, Sri.M.Ajay, learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala State Pollution Control Board and Sri.K.K.Unni, learned counsel appearing for the additional fifth respondent in W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012 (the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.10766 of 2012). In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, I am of the opinion that this Court need not await service of notice on the eighth respondent and hear him. It is evident from the pleadings and the materials on record that the application filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012 on 22.3.2012 for renewal of the licence issued to him to operate the quarry under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996 that was first issued in the year 2009 and was being periodically renewed, was rejected by the committee that met on 19.4.2012. It was communicated to him only when Ext.R1(e) order dated 26.7.2012 was issued to him. By Ext.R5(a) letter dated 13.4.2011, the Secretary of the Irattayar Grama Panchayat called upon the petitioner to produce a No Objection Certificate from the Fire and Rescue Services and a No Objection Certificate from the District Medical Officer of Health for the purpose of considering his application for renewal of the license. The aforesaid certificates, copies of which are on record as Exts.P11 and P12 were produced by the petitioner along with Ext.P14 letter dated 2.7.2012. However even before the petitioner could produce the aforesaid documents, the committee of the Panchayat that met on 19.4.2012 resolved to reject the application, having regard to the objections raised by the neighbouring residents and also for the reason that No Objection Certificates from the Fire and Rescue Services and the District Medical Officer have not been produced. In Ext.P10 letter, by which the petitioner was called upon to produce the No Objection Certificates from the aforesaid authorities, no time limit was stipulated for production of the certificates. On the other hand, he was informed that the application for renewal of the license can be considered only after the said certificates are produced. However for reasons best known to the members of the Panchayat, they decided on 19.4.2012 to reject the application for the reason that No Objection Certificates mentioned in Ext.P10 have not been produced. In fact, the petitioner made available the said certificates which were issued on 26.6.2012 and 28.6.2012 on 2.7.2012 along with Ext.P14 letter. It was thereafter that Ext.R5(g) order dated 26.7.2012 was issued informing the petitioner that the committee of the Panchayat that met on 19.4.2012 resolved to reject his application for renewing the license. In my opinion, having regard to the stipulations in Ext.P10 letter, the committee of the Panchayat ought to have awaited the production of a No Objection Certificate from the Fire and Rescue Services and the District Medical Officer before taking a final decision on the petitioner's application for renewing the license. Such being the situation, I am of the opinion that petitioner in W.P.(C)No.9842 of 2012 is entitled to have his application for renewal of the license issued under the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licenses to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996 submitted on 22.3.2012, reconsidered having regard to the stand taken by District Medical Officer in Ext.P12 No Objection Certificate and the Fire and Rescue Services in Ext.P11 No Objection Certificate, as also, the objections raised by the neighbouring residents in their representation, a copy of which is produced as Ext.R1(b) along with the counter affidavit filed by the local authority.