IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 28TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 5110 of 2011(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.V.ABRAHAM, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE,PULIMPALLIL HOUSE, KADAPRA VILLAGE AND MURI, NIRAMAN P.O.,THIRUVALLA TALUK BY ADV. SRI.CHERIAN GEE VARGHESE SRI.P.HARIDAS SMT.S.SIKKY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,CIVIL STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA 2. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE PATHANAMTHITTA 3. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, MAKKAMKUNNU PATHANAMTHITTA 4. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA 5. THE REVENNUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. P. NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 5110 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 17th February , 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is the owner of a granite quarry and was operating the same on the basis of the license, was forced to stop the operation, because of the 'stop memo' issued by the first respondent. Complying with the instructions, the petitioner filed necessary applications for clearance before the concerned respondents and is now before this Court seeking for issuance of directions to the said respondents to consider the applications preferred by the petitioner for redressal of his grievances. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext. P2 application has been submitted before the second respondent for granting necessary explosive license, while Ext. P3 application has been preferred before the 4th respondent with regard to the consent to be issued by the Pollution Control Board. The main prayer sought for in the Writ Petition is to direct the above respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts. P2 and P3 applications. W.P.(C) No. 5110 OF 2011 2 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2 and 5 as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4. 4. After hearing both the sides, the second and fourth respondents are directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts. P2 and P3 applications respectively, in accordance with law. The proceedings, as above, shall be finalised after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment . The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the concerned respondents for taking further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk