IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2011 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14857 of 2011(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- S.T.BABU ACHARI, PROPRIETOR, ALANKAR WOOD INDUSTRIES, RESIDING AT SANKARAVELLYIL, AMBAZZHACHAL, THOKKUPARA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR. P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST AND WILD LIFE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (SA) AND NODAL OFFICER, CONVENOR, STATE LEVEL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE FOR WOOD BASED INDUSTRIES IN KERALA, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014. 3. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MUNNAR, DEVIKULAM. 4. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, MUNNAR, DEVIKULAM. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. BENNY VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 14857 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 2nd June , 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is running a furniture mart under the name and style “Alankar Wood Industries” in the concerned Grama Panchayath with SSI registration from the Industries Department and the requisite NOC issued by the authorities under the Forest Department. 2. According to the petitioner, Ext. P4 application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of NOC was in fact recommended by the 3rd respondent as borne by the proceedings dated 25.08.2007 [Ext. P5 (2)] and that the same was forwarded by the Forest Conservator, Kottayam to the second respondent as borne by Ext. P5 dated 29.09.2007. The grievance of the petitioner is that, in spite of satisfying all the requirements, the petitioner Unit is going to be closed down by the authorities of the Forest Department, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no justification for the respondent to place any hurdle against the petitioner's running the unit. More so, since the concerned W.P. (C) No. 14857 of 2011 : 2 : authorities have already issued recommendation as borne by Ext. P5 and further, the position with regard to the 'renewal of existing licence' stands entirely on a different footing. The petitioner is placing reliance on Ext. P6 G.O dated 16.06.2000 issued by the Government in this regard and Ext. P7 verdict passed by this Court in W.P(C) Nos. 34505 & 34697 of 2010 on 24.11.2010, wherein similar situation was dealt with, granting appropriate relief. 4. In the said circumstances, this Court does not find it proper to refrain from granting similar relief as given in Ext. P7. The Writ Petition is disposed of, making it clear that, the operation of the furniture unit of the petitioner shall not be intercepted, till appropriate orders are passed by the State Level committee for renewal of the NOCs in the light of Ext. P5 recommendation. It is made clear that the activities carried on by the petitioners shall stand confined to what the petitioner is entitled under the original licence issued to him. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd