IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 29336 of 2008(P) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- HHA TANK TERMINAL PVT LIMITED, 24/1869, MURAF AREA, INDIRA GANDHI ROAD, WILLNGDON ISLAND, KOCHI. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY K.MOHANDAS. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDON ISLAND ,KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, 2. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR, COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI. 3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, C2, 3RD FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, OPP CSEZ, KAKANAD P.O., KOCHI 682 037. 4. RUCHI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., A4, SOUTH RECLAMATION AREA, MATSYAPURI P.O., WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. ADV. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH, CGC FOR R3 SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R1,R2 & R4 SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR FOR R1,R2 & R4 SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI FOR R1,R2 & R4 SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS FOR R1,R2 & R4 SRI.ANIL D. NAIR FOR R1, R2 & R4 SRI.V.J.ANAND FOR R1, R2 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.29336 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 31st October, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by the inability or refusal on the part of the respondents 1 to 3 in prohibiting the 4th respondent from laying of an above ground level petroleum pipeline, stated to be close to the western boundary wall of the petitioners Petroleum Tank Terminal. It is contended that a pipeline will have to be laid below the ground and if an exception is to be made, the same should be permitted by the competent authority the Chief Controller of Explosives. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, this position is accepted as evident from Exhibit R4(a). The 4th respondent has approached the Chief Controller of Explosives for such deviation or modification in the matter of laying the pipeline for a length of 400 meters. What is involved at present is only a civil work, either by way of laying the pipeline for a W.P ( C) No.29336 of 2008 2 short distance or repairing the same. But the 4th respondent also undertakes that the pipeline will be charged only after obtaining the requisite permission from the Chief Controller of Explosives or by any other competent authority as contemplated by the statutory rules. Submission is recorded. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the permission will have to be granted by the Chief Controller of Explosives and if the permission is granted, it might affect the operations carried on by the 4th respondent, it is appropriate that the Chief Controller of Explosives hears the petitioner also before taking a decision on Exhibit R4 (e). I do not find any reason why such opportunity should not be granted to the petitioner. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of holding that if the petitioner files a written objection before the Chief Controller of Explosives in the matter of Exhibit R4(e) the said authority will take note of such objections also and hear a representative of the petitioner before a decision is taken on Exhibit R4(e). A copy of the writ petition, a W.P ( C) No.29336 of 2008 3 counter affidavit and copy of this judgment shall be produced before the Chief Controller of Explosives by the petitioner. Since the time frame is crucial in so far as the 4th respondent is concerned, petitioner shall produce all these documents within three weeks from today. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.29336 of 2008 4 W.P ( C) No.29336 of 2008 5