IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1586 of 2011(A) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.14655/2011 Dated 23/09/2011 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: -------------- ANSE N.M, S/O.MEERAN,AGED 30 YEARS, NAREEKKAMATTOM HOUSE,METHALA P.O, KOTTACHIRA,PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE,KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM 682 030 3. NELLIKUZHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NELLIKUZHI P.O.,KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DIST 686 691 4. ASAMANNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, ASAMANNOOR P.O.,PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 683 549 5. T.M.ALIYAR, THELAKKATTU HOUSE, KUTTILANJI, ERAMALLOOR P.O.,KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 686 691 G.P. SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL FOR R1&R2 ADV. SRI.P.K.UHAMMED FOR R3 ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY FOR R5 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag. C.J. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.1586 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, Ag. C.J. Writ Appeal is filed against judgment of the learned Single Judge directing the respondents to consider appellant's objections while considering 5th respondent's request to approve the plan for construction of Timber Peeling Unit and for manufacture of plywood and packing cases. It is seen from the judgment that while one W.P.(C) filed by the 5th respondent was for direction to all the authorities to consider his request for approvals and permissions including permission for construction of the building, the other W.P.(C) was filed opposing starting of the industry by the 5th respondent on account of violation of norms particularly, the dense population in the area where the industry is proposed. The learned Single Judge did not consider the objections raised by the appellant nor the eligibility of the 5th respondent, but directed the 5th respondent's application to be considered and along with it the objections filed by the appellant. We 2 do not find any grievance for the appellant because it is for the authorities concerned to consider while approving permit and clearances as to whether appellant's objections are tenable under law. While granting permit, the authority concerned, whether it be Government or Panchayat, should consider the nuisance caused to neighbouring owners including the appellant and the suitability of the place for starting the industry. Since appellant is given full opportunity to raise all objections before concerned authorities, we do not know why the appellant should challenge the judgment which is in his favour. We, therefore, close the Writ Appeal leaving it open to the appellant to send in advance all his objections before all authorities concerned along with copy of judgment for them to consider objections while considering 5th respondent's application for clearance and approval. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Acting Chief Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms