SOORYA NARAYANA CHETTIAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners 1 and 2 seek police protection to carry on a smoke house which according to the petitioners has been granted all licences. The first petitioner is the father and the second petitioner is his son. Ext.P1 is the consent to operate issued by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board for carrying on the smoke house. The first petitioner has obtained commercial building permit as is seen from Ext.P3. The petitioners submit that the party respondents are objecting to the smoke house and hence, the petitioners should be granted police protection. When the matter came up for admission, we specifically queried the learned counsel for the petitioners as to the D&O licence obtained by the petitioners for carrying on the smoke house. Today, the learned counsel has produced application to implead the Panchayat, but however, not produced any D&O licence. Again on a query raised, the learned counsel for the petitioners has produced a D&O licence issued in the name of the second petitioner. We see that the licence is issued for trading in rubber. Hence, there is no licence obtained for carrying on the smoke house. The petitioners definitely would be entitled to approach the local authority and obtain such a licence. However, as of now, we are of the opinion that there could be no order passed in the writ petition. The writ petition would stand dismissed with the above said observation. No order as to costs.