IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 2ND ASWINA 1931 RP.No. 899 of 2009 -------------------------------- AGAINST JUDGMENT IN WA 1908/2009 DATED 25.8.2009 REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.R.RAMANAN, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT KUNNERVELIYIL HOUSE, KANNIMANGALAM, NEDUVATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 574. 2. ILLITHODE-MULAMKUZHY GRAMA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FRANCIS NJALIAN, MALAYATTOOR P.O., ILLITHODE, KALADY VIA. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.RAMPRASAD UNNI.T. RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS 1 & 2, RESPONDENTS 3,4,5 & 6 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. GURUDEVAN METAL CRUSHERS, KANNIMANGALAM, NADUVATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 524, REPRESENTED BY SRI.M.A.JANARDANAN. 2. SMT.SANTHA JANARDANAN, W/O.SRI.JANARDANAN, GURUDEVAN METAL CRUSHERS, KANNIMANGALAM, NADUVATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 524. 3. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROLLOL BOARD, REP.BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, OANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, ALUVA TALUK, ALUVA. 6. MALAYATTOOR-NELESWARAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.M.M.ABDUL AZIZ, SR. ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM RP NO.899 OF 2009 - 2 - R3 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS R4 & R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA R6 BY SRI.G.KURIAKOSE G.THEKKEL THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. -------------------------------------------------------- R.P.No.899 of 2009 in W.A. No.1908 of 2009 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2009 ORDER S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. This review petition is filed by the petitioners in W.P. (C) No.9605 of 2008 pointing out that there is a typographical mistake at paragraph 3 of the judgment in W.A.No.1908 of 2009 wherein the necessary party is referred to as 'petitioner/appellant' instead of 'respondents 3 and 4/appellants'. This appears to be a typographical mistake. Hence the office is directed to correct the same. 2. It is also brought to our notice by way of review petition that the penultimate sentence in the impugned judgment requires clarification as the words 'particular land' are very vague and confusing. R.P.No.899 of 2009 - 2 - 3. Considering the argument now raised and after hearing both the counsels, we make it clear that the words 'particular land' in the penultimate sentence of the impugned judgment means land covered under Ext.R5(a) patta and in respect of which licence for quarrying is issued. Review petition is disposed of as above. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns/vku.