S PATHROSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the owner of 11 cents of property in Sy. No. 53/3 of Kadakkavoor Village. He applied to the Anjengo Panchayat for licence for manufacturing ice and for constructing a building for the plant. Ext. P1 will show that the Panchayat had permitted him to install 50 H.P. electric motor. It will further show that the District Medical Officer and the District Fire Force Officer had granted their approval. Ext. P2 is the order issued by the Executive Officer separately on the basis of Ext. P1 sanctioning construction of the work place as well as the starting of industry for manufacturing ice. Ext. P5 registration certificate issued by the Director of Industries and Commerce will show that the product to be manufactured is ice blocks acid the raw materials are fresh water and ammonia gas. Petitioner also applied electricity connection and the Electricity Board granted the same by Ext. P6. On the basis of the above, petitioner has started construction of the building.

(2.) According to the petitioner, there were frequent interference from the fifth respondent-President of Anehuthengu Muslim Juma Ath during the construction of the building. The proposed ice plant and the mosque are situated on the opposite sides of the road. When there was interference by the fifth respondent, petitioner got police protection from the Revenue Divisional Officer. Subsequently, petitioner received copy of the communication addressed by the District Collector to Circle Inspector of Police, Attingal. This refers to a complaint by the fifth respondent. It is stated that on enquiry, it was found that there is every likelihood of Juma Ath being polluted by dirty water from the proposed ice plant and also the entire atmosphere will be polluted with foul smell of fish. This may create difficulties, for those who go to Juma Ath and ultimately result in communal tension. On the basis of this, Circle Inspector of Police was directed to see that the construction of the building is not made further. Subsequently, petitioner approached the District Collector and sought permission for completion of the construction of the building and undertook that he would not start manufacturing process until he hears from the District Collector.

(3.) It is seen that on the basis of the complaint of the fifth respondent, District Collector made enquiries through the Circle Inspector of Police and on the basis of his personal inspection, District Collector passed Ext. P9 order by which he came to the conclusion that if the ice plant is allowed to be operated in the area, there is every likelihood of the neighbouring area being polluted and further lorries carrying fish will be parked in front of the Juma Ath and this may ultimately lead to communal tension. By Ext. P9, District Collector directed the Executive Officer of the Panchayat to cancel the licence. Against Ext. P9, petitioner filed representation before the Government. But the Government dismissed the same by means of Ext. P10 order. Petitioner prays for quashing of Exts. P7, P9 and P10 and for a direction not to interfere with the construction of the ice plant by the petitioner.