IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 1329 of 2009(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.32385/2008 Dated 23/03/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.PARAMESWARA MENON, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.ALAPPAT MADHAVA MENON, HOUSE NO.VIII/11, MULLOTH HOUSE, KUMBALAM VILLAGE, PANANGAD-682 506, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHIRAZ ABDULLA SRI.IMTHIYAZ AHAMED SRI.JOJO PAPPACHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SRI.MAITHILI, 40 YEARS OF AGE, THE CHIEF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI. 2. DR.JEENA MOHAN, 42 YEARS OF AGE, MEDICAL OFFICER IN CHARGE, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, PANANGAD P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 506. 3. M/S.EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., ZONAL OFFICE, PODANUR, COIMBATORE-641 023. ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY FOR R3 SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS,SC,POLL.C.BOAR FOR R1 SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT K.R.DEEPA FOR R2 THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Contempt of Court Case No.1329/2009-S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 4th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is the first petitioner in W.P. (C).No.32385/2008 wherein, by Annexure-I Judgment, this Court directed the seventh respondent therein to take whatever steps necessary to ensure that the directives issued by the Pollution Control Board and the Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Panangad as contained in Exts.R7(1) and R7(3) are complied with. It was further directed that he shall proceed to operate the asbestos storing facility only after obtaining clearance in that regard from the aforementioned authorities. Herein, the petitioner alleges that these directions have not been complied with by the respondents herein. 2. All the respondents have filed affidavits in the matter. The second respondent-Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Panangad in her affidavit has stated that on 24/11/2008, the place was inspected and notice was sent to the concerned party on 27/11/2008, and informing the directions to be complied with. After the Judgment of this Court, dated 23/03/2009, notice was again issued to the party concerned to comply with various measures to be taken by them and, the place was again inspected and at the time C.O.C. No.1329/2009 -:2:- of inspection it was found that the various instructions have been complied with. Accordingly, the views of the Medical Officer was communicated to the Panchayat. 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the Pollution Control Board on 22/02/2010 also, it is pointed out that the statutory enquiry on the consent application was conducted on 04/04/2009. The unit was not working at that time. The facilities were found to be sufficient and consent was issued to the unit on 15/04/2009. In paragraph (6) they have answered in detail to the pollution problem alleged by the petitioner and the remedial action taken by the unit, and it is further mentioned that consent was issued to the unit only after ensuring that all the remedial actions have been taken. A further report has been filed by the Pollution Control Board today, in the form of an affidavit, wherein it is mentioned that the unit has provided certain additional control measures, mentioned in the report. Accordingly, it has been reported that the unit has complied with the conditions as per the consent order issued by the Board except tarring/concreting of inside roads. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent also submitted that they have complied with all C.O.C. No.1329/2009 -:3:- the measures directed to be taken. The various measures taken by them have been detailed in the counter affidavit. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the claims made by the third respondent that they have complied with the directions are not correct. It is submitted that the Northern side of the premises has not been covered. But the reports of the Pollution Control Board and the Medical Officer show the otherwise. In that view of the matter, I do not find any reason to proceed with this Contempt of Court Case. If the petitioner has got any other complaints regarding the non compliance of any other measures which have been detailed by the respondents, it is up to them to move the Panchayat, Pollution Control Board and the Medical Officer. The Pollution Control Board will also conduct periodical inspection of the premises. In that view of the matter as no further action is called for and as I am also satisfied that the directions issued by this Court have been complied with, the Contempt of Court Case is closed. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE