C K SULAIMAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the owner of a property having an extent of 30.72 ares in Survey No.189/8-2 in Block No.21 of Vengola Village, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to take up application for renewal of consent for his plywood unit and to reconsider the same in view of Ext.P11 judgment, after setting aside Ext.P10 order and to pass appropriate orders on merits, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court; a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P10 order and declare that the said order is illegal, arbitrary and nonest; and a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to consider the application made by the petitioner on 17.10.2013, vide application dated 24.09.2013, and renew consent for the plywood unit.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board, representing respondents 2 and 3.

(3.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P10 order dated 23.01.2019 of the 2nd respondent, whereby the application made for renewal of consent for his plywood unit stands rejected. The fact that Ext.P10 order passed by the 2nd respondent is appealable before the appellate authority under Section 28 of the Water Act, 1974 and Section 31 of the Air Act, 1981 is not in dispute.