MUJEEB Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners state themselves to be the residents of Tirurangadi Taluk in Malappuram District. The grievance of the petitioners, as stated by them, that has compelled them to file this writ petition is that they suspect that the 8th respondent, who is their neighbour, is attempting to start a paint manufacturing unit without the requisite licences and consents in law. This writ petition has been filed, therefore, seeking that respondents 2 to 7 be directed to ensure that the 8th respondent does not commence any operation in his building comprised in Re.Sy.No.147/1, Edarikkode Village situated in the jurisdictional limits of the 3rd respondent Grama Panchayath.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Jamsheed Hafiz, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 5th respondents 3, 4 and 5, the learned counsel appearing for the 8th respondent and the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2, 6 and 7.

(3.) The only reason why the petitioners have filed this writ petition, as is available from the pleading, is that they apprehend that the 8th respondent will begin a paint manufacturing unit without proper licence. Today when this matter was considered, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent Grama Panchayath, Sri. K.R.Avinash submitted that, contrary to the assertions of the petitioners, 8th respondent has not commenced a paint manufacturing unit, but he adds that the 8th respondent has filed a proper application before the Panchayath seeking a licence to start the said unit. According to him, the Panchayath is yet to consider and pass appropriate orders on it and he, therefore, says that this writ petition has been filed in an experimental manner.