IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN SATURDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2010 / 10TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 12663 of 2008(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- "PALLIKOODAM", KALATHIPADY VADAVATHOOR, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY MARY ROY, SECRETARY, CORPUS CHRISTI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY (REG. NO.K.97 OF 1976), KALATHIPADY VADAVATHOOR, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SMT.LEKHA SURESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 5. VIJAYAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT VADAVATHOOR, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 6. THE PRIMARY HEALTH OFFICER PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, PARAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. 7. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REGIONAL OFFICE KOTTAYAM. 8. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (NATIONAL HIGHWAY), OFFICE OF THE ASST. ENGINEER NATIONAL HIGHWAY, KANJIRAPPILLY, KOTTAYAM. R1, R3, R4, R6 & R8 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B. REMANI R2 & R7 BY ADV. MR.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS,SC,POLL.C.BOARD. R5 BY ADV. MR.SALIM V.S. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 12663/2008-G APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29/01/2008. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/01/2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 08/08/2008. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.C2/2152/08 DATED 11/08/2008 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.12663 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT The fact situation, as of now, is that the petitioner is in a dilemma. Learned counsel for the petitioner says so because of the topsy-turvy action of the respondent in the matter of permitting sewage waste to be discharged into the open drain. The petitioner is justified in saying that the said activity would be against public health and injurious to the society. Respondents 3 to 8 are, therefore, directed to ensure that any nuisance as complained of by the petitioner shall stand abated within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and if any such circumstance recur, such respondents would be personally responsible for costs as also other damages and penalty that may be imposed in any proceedings that the petitioner may bring hereafter. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.03/02.