IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18776 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- R. SUKESH, S/O.RAGHAVAN, KUMARI MANDIRAM, YEROOR. P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 312. BY ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN, SMT.MINI.S.DAS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND WILD LIFE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE CHIEF FOREST CONSERVATOR (SPECIAL AFFORESTATION)AND NODAL OFFICER, CONVENER, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. 3. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001. 4. THE RANGE OFFICER, FOREST RANGE OFFICE, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 019. R1 TO R4 BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.M. POULOSE. GOVT. PLEADER MR.M.H. HANIL KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 18776 of 2011(V) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE NO.37/66-67 DATED 25/10/1996 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO RAGHAVAN. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.13 OF 1974-75 ISSUED BY THE YEROOR PANCHAYAT DATED 07/09/1974 TO RAGHAVAN FOR THE SAW MILL. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE RENEWED LICENSE ISSUED BY THE YEROOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT VIDE NO.A2-159/2000(B) DATED 20/12/2001. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 06/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE YEROOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT FOR CONDUCTING J.R. SAW MILL AT YEROOR EXT.P5: COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE YEROOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 07/05/2010 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6(a) & (b): COPY OF THE ELECTRICITY BILL DATED 07/06/2011 FOR CONDUCTING SAW MILL ISSUED BY THE ELECTRICITY BOARD IN FAVOUR OF RAGHAVAN. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE WITH REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND CONVENER, EXPERT COMMITTEE. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR NOC FOR THE J & R SAW MILL, YERROR TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT DATED 26/04/2011 CONDUCTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE SAW MILL OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05/07/2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18776 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is conducting a saw mill at Yeroor in Kollam District. Ext.P1 registration certificate issued in favour of his father is dated 25.10.1966. Ext.P2 licence of the Panchayath was issued on 7.9.1974 and it is stated to have been renewed from time to time. Prima facie, the aforesaid materials indicate that the Unit was in existence continuously from 1966. Meanwhile, petitioner also made Ext.P8 application to the 2nd respondent for obtaining NOC on which verification has been conducted and Ext.P9 is the report submitted. 2. The matter is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent and in the meanwhile, petitioner has been issued with Ext.P10 notice of closure. The only reason stated in the notice is the order passed by this Court in WP W.P.(C) No. 18776 OF 2011 :2 : (C) No. 9155/07 and that the Unit does not have NOC. 3. That order referred to in Ext.P10 was passed in the context of plywood industries and not in the context of saw mill as in the case of the petitioner. That apart, in so far as the NOC is concerned it is seen that the petitioner has already made application and the verification is already over. In the light of the above and also having regard to the prima facie materials indicating the existence of the Unit prior to 30.10.2002, Ext.P10 closure notice is unwarranted. 4. Hence I dispose of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P8 NOC application made by the petitioner. Until orders are passed as directed above, the status quo as on today will be maintained. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge