(1.) W.P.(C) No.38826 of 2023 W.P.(C) No.38826 of 2023 is filed by an action council aggrieved by the non consideration of the complaint submitted against the issuance of Ext.P5 Environmental Clearance for the functioning of a building stone quarry owned by the 7th respondent, who was the Proprietor of Nayampadam Granites. The petitioner essentially contends that the proposed entry route does not have road access to the permitted area and that the exit road is a road going through a residential colony having a width of only 3 metres and also alleged that there were residential buildings situated on either side of the road very close to the above-mentioned exit road.
(2.) It is based on this complaint that Ext.P6 representation has been filed before the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), the 2ndrespondent. The 7th respondent filed a counter affidavit as an answer to the above allegation made by the writ petitioner, which is as follows:-
(3.) Though the 7threspondent denied the allegation made against him, to avoid any possible inconvenience to the exit and entry permitted in the environment clearance, the 7th respondent had arranged an alternative road having a width of more than 8 metres by obtaining consent from the land owners concerned. The above statements made in the counter affidavit are recorded. Since, the learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the same was the only reason for making the complaint, given the undertaking given by the 7threspondent in the counter affidavit filed and taking note of the fact that the 2ndrespondent SEIAA had permitted the use of the road, the petitioner cannot have any further grievance in the light of the undertaking given by the 7threspondent. Accordingly, W.P.(C) No.38826 of 2023 is closed, making it clear that the complaint raised by the petitioner stands redressed. Needless to say, the 2ndrespondent shall not proceed with any complaint made by the petitioner in this case.