IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 26540 of 2008(H) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.A JOSEPH, OLICKAL HOUSE, MONIPPALLI P.O, KOTTAYAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.BIJI MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, ELANJI GRAMA PANCHAYATH ELANJI.P.O.,ERNAKULAM. 3. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,ALUVA ERNAKULAM DT. 5. SUNIL KUMAR, M/S. T & K INDUSTRIES, MUTHOLAPURAM, ELANJI, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.V.MANOJ KUMAR ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26540 of 2008(H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL FOR THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATE 26.03.2008. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.02.2008. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.10.2007 IN W.P.(C) NO. 24512 OF 2007. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9.5.2008 IS PRODUCED. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.05.2008. EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.07.2008 BEFORE 4TH RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.26540 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the resident of a property adjacent to a property where the 5th respondent intends to establish a crusher unit. The petitioner's contention is that the establishment of the crusher unit is in violation of the orders of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institution. It is further submitted that the 5th respondent is running the crusher unit without a licence. However, the petitioner now submits that at present the unit is not functioning. That being so, the petitioner cannot have any grievance at least for the present. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach this Court again if the petitioner has got any grievance in respect of the crusher unit of the 5th respondent. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs