IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 19029 of 2011(C) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. SRI. K.P.RAVEENDRA PANICKER, KUNNUKALAYIL HOUSE, PULLAD P.O. 2. N.J.MOHANAN NAIR, EDAYADIYIL VEEDU, PUNNAKKATT P.O., KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. C.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR, CHAKKITTAYIL HOUSE, CHERUKOLE P.O., KOZHENCHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, RANNI-689 672. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, SPECIAL AFORESTATION AND NODAL OFFICER, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. 3. CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY MEMBER SECRETARY, GATE NO.31, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.19029/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE KOIPURAM PANCHAYAT TO THE SIT PETITIONER ON 4.12.1987. P2:- COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE PANCHYAT TO THE IST PETITIONER RENEWED UPTO 2012. P3:- COPY OF THE NOC ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE IST PETITIONER P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 27.4.2011 ISSUED BY THE ADDL. FACTORY INSPECTOR TO THE IST PETITIONER. P5:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P8:- COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT, DTD. 27.4.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE FOREST OFFICIALS. P7:- COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. P8:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF LICENSE FEE BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DT. 27.2.2010. P9:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTDF. 18.1.1997 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. P10:- COPY OF THE NOC, DTD. 6.6.05 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. P11:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR NOC SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. P12:- COPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPROT DT. 28.4.11. P13:- COPY OF THE LETTER, DTD. 15.5.2001 ISSUED BY THE SINGLE WINDOW CLEARANCE BOARD TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. P14:- COPY OF THE LICENSE DTD. 13.6.2001 ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. P15:- COPY OF THE LATEST LICENSE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD UPTO 2012. P16:- COPY OF THE NOC ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER P17:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 6.2.2006 FOR RUNNING THE SAW MILL AND FURNITURE SHOP TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. W.P.(C) NO.19029/2011 P18:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 7.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. P19:- COPY OF THE GO 4279.G2.04.ID DTD. 15.6.2004. P20:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 4.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, RANNI. P20(a):- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 4.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, RANNI TO THE IST PETITIONER. P21:- COPY OF THE NOTICE. DTD. 5.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO CLOSE DOWN THE UNITS OF THE PETITIONERS . P22:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 1.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P23:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT, DTD. 7.2.2011 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC. 99/2011. P24:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.FC3-5802/2010 DTD. 14.12.2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P25:- COPY OF THE STATUS OF DISPOSAL APPLICATION FOR NOC. P26:- COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC. 8345/2011 DTD. 23.3.2011 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P27:- COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC. 19609/2010 DTD. 23.6.2010 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P28:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT PAYMENT OF THE LICENSE FEE FOR YEAR 1998-1999 REMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).19029/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioners are saw mill and furniture Unit owners. They are aggrieved by Exts.P20, P20(a) and P21 notices of closure requiring them to close down their respective Units. It is on the issuance of these notices they have filed this writ petition. 2. In so far as the first petitioner is concerned, Ext.P1 is the licence issued in his favour from the Panchayat on 4.12.1987. This licence has been renewed periodically and Ext.P2 shows its renewal for the year 2011. Ext.P3 is the NOC issued by the Forest Department in the year 2003 and Ext.P4 is the Factory licence obtained by him in 2011. He has applied for NOC by Ext.P5(4) application made to the second respondent and Ext.P6 is the verification report. His application for NOC is pending before the second respondent. 3. In so far as the second petitioner is concerned, Ext.P28 shows that the petitioner had paid late fee for the D & O licence for the W.P.(C).19029/11 2 period 1998-99. Similarly Ext.P8 indicates payment of D & O licence fee for the period 2008-09. Second petitioner was also issued Ext.P9 NOC dated 18.1.1997 by the Divisional Forest Officer. He made Ext.P11 application for NOC, which is pending consideration by the second respondent and Ext.P12 is the verification report. 4. In so far as the third petitioner is concerned, Ext.18 shows that his application for NOC has been rejected by the second respondent by order dated 7.7.2007 with a direction to apply in respect of furniture Unit. Therefore, his case stands on a different footing and he is not entitled to any relief in this writ petition. 5. Thus, it is evident that the application made by the petitioners 1 and 2 for NOC are pending consideration before the second respondent and prima facie, it appears that they are entitled to NOC for the reason that the materials indicate the existence of the Unit prior to 30.10.2002. In that view of the matter, at this stage, it was unnecessary to have ordered closure of their Units. Therefore, the writ petition will stand disposed of with the following directions. W.P.(C).19029/11 3 6. Exts.P5 and P11 applications for NOC submitted by petitioners 1 and 2 will be considered by the second respondent in the light of Exts.P6 and P12 verification reports and orders thereon will be passed and communicated to the petitioners. Until orders are passed as above, status quo in so far as petitioners 1 and 2 will be allowed to continue. It is clarified that petitioners 1 and 2 will be entitled to continue only those activities which are permissible in terms of the licence obtained from the local authority. 7. In so far as the third petitioner is concerned, the writ petition will stand dismissed leaving it open to him to make a fresh application before the second respondent. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs