IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20281 of 2011(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. NELLIYAMPATHY SAW MILL,POTHUNDY ROAD, NENMARA, PALAKKAD, REP.BY PROPRIETOR, A.NOUSHAD, S/O.V.AHAMMED KABEER, POTHUNDY ROAD, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD-678541. 2. M/S.APPUNNI SAW MILL & TIMBERS, AYINAMPADAM, NEMMMARA, PALAKKAD. REP.BY PROPRIETOR, A.SAJEEVAN, S/O.APPUNNI, AYINAMPADAM, NEMMARA, PALAKKAD. 3. SREELAKSHMI SAW MILLS & TIMBERS, KANIMANGALAM, NEMMARA. REP.BY PROPRIETOR, N.CHENTHAMARAKSHAN, S/O.NARAYANA PANICKER, PADINJARE HOUSE, VALLANGHY, NEMARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.JOHN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, (SPECIAL AFFORESTATION) & NODAL OFFICER, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014. 2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NEMMARA DIVISION, PALAKKAD-678 506. 3. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, NELLIYAMPATHY RANGE, NEMMARA DIVISION, PALAKKAD-678 506. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENNY VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.20281/11 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE FACTORY LICENCE NO.N/PGT(S)/09/2/88 DT 17.12.2008. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE FEE RECEIPT DT 23.2.1995 ISSUED BY THE NEMARA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOC DATED 29.11.06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT DT 2.5.2011. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF the NOTICE NO.N.807/2010 DT 6.7.11 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE SSI REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DT 8.5.1981 ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PALGHAT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE FACTORY LICENCE NO.N/PGT(S)9/434/88 DT 29.11.2007 ISSUED BY THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FACTORIES AND BOILERS. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE NOC ORDER NO.O1-7076/2003/K.DIS DT 7.7.04 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT DT 2.5.2011. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE STOP NOTICE NO.N1-807/2010 DT 6.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE NOC NO.A1-7986/96 DT 29.11.96 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE SSI REGISTRATION DATED 30.6.1998 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER DIST.INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PALAKKAD. EXT.P13: TRUE COPY OF THE D&O LICENCE FEE RECEIPT DT 27.7.98 ISSUED BY THE NEMMARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P13(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT 27.5.11 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEGEMENT CARD DT 30.5.11. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE STOP NOTICE NO.N-1-807/2010 DT 6.7.11 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// Rp P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 20281 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are owners of saw mills. They are aggrieved by the notices issued by the respondents requiring them to close down their saw mills on the ground that they have not obtained NOC issued by the 1st respondent. It is in the said circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 2. In several cases of this nature, taking note of the fact of the prima facie material produced indicating the existence of the saw mill prior to 30/10/2002 and the pendency of the NOC applications made by the saw mill owners, this Court directed that orders be passed on the NOC applications and that the status quo be allowed to continue in the meanwhile. 3. In so far as this writ petition is concerned, prima facie materials produced by the petitioners show that their units are having licence of the local authority, NOC from the forest authorities and registrations have been obtained as small scale industrial units. On the applications made by petitioners 1 and 2 for NOC, verification also has been completed and reports thereof WPC No.20281/11 :2 : are Exts.P4 and P9. In so far as the 3rd petitioner is concerned, Ext.P14 shows that the application made by him has been received in the office of the 1st respondent. 4. Thus prima facie, the materials produced indicate the existence of the units prior to 30/10/2002 and the pendency of the applications for NOC is also established. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to think that the notices of closure evidenced by Exts.P5, P10 and P15 were unwarranted at this stage. Therefore, the writ petition will stand disposed of directing the 1st respondent to pass orders on the applications made by the petitioners for NOC and that in the meanwhile, status quo as on date will be allowed to continue. However, the activities in the mills belonging to the petitioners shall be confined to what are permitted in terms of the licences obtained by them from the local authority concerned. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp