IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2011 / 4TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 34842 of 2009(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S.SOUMYA SOCIAL WELFARE CENTRE REG. NO.492/93, ASWANE VILLA, H.NO.VII, PALIYAMKARA, ANGAMALY-678 357, A CHARITABLE SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.V.T.JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.P.I.DAVIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. SECRETARY, AYYAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, AYYAMPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. 2. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY. 3. KERALA KHADI GRAMA INDUSTRIES BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AYYAMPUZHA. R1 BY ADV. SMT.K.K.THULACY BHAI SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN R2 BY ADV.SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS,SC,POLL.C.BOARD R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH,SC,KERALA KHADI BOARD R4 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.34842/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19/12/1995 IN O.P.NO.17872/1995 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P2 COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.2896/96/LAD DATED 3/10/1998. P3 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23/8/2004 IN O.P.NO.13074 OF 2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P4 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3/1/2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P5 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7/11/2009 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R3(A) COPY OF THE BOARD RESOLUTION R3(B) COPY OF THE INTIMATION LETTER /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.34842 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Society, who obtained licences and No Objection Certificate from the Pollution Control Board for setting up a stone crusher unit. When the petitioner started work of installation of the unit, the local people obstructed the same complaining of likely pollution. The petitioner obtained police protection as per Ext.P1 judgment. By Ext.P3 judgment, certain directions were issued to the 1st respondent Panchayat in the matter of issue of licence to the petitioner. The Panchayat directed the petitioner to move the Pollution Control Board. In spite of all these, the petitioner could not complete the construction for want of licence from the Panchayat. The petitioner had obtained loan from the 3rd respondent Board for starting the Unit. The 3rd respondent is now initiating proceedings for recovery of the loan amounts. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: W.P.(C)No.34842/09 2 “i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 4 to take appropriate actions as directed in Ext.P1 and P3 judgments for completing the installation works of the metal crusher unit pursuant to the on-objection certificate issued by the second respondent pollution control board. ii) Call for the records leading to Ext.P5 issued by the third respondent and quash the same by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari. iii) Issue appropriate writ, order or direction to the third respondent to reschedule the loan taken by the petitioner and permit the petitioner to repay the same in instalments as directed in Ext.P3 judgment”. 2. I have heard the parties. The petitioner has no case that the loan was granted by the 3rd respondent on conditions regarding licence etc. The question of licence has to be taken by the petitioner with the Panchayat and the Pollution Control Board appropriately. The 3rd respondent cannot be asked to wait indefinitely for repayment of the loan taken by the petitioner from the 3rd respondent. When it was put to the petitioner as to whether the petitioner is prepared to pay the amounts in instalments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without starting the production in the unit, the petitioner is not in a position to repay the amounts. 3. I do not think that this Court can direct the 3rd respondent to postpone recovery indefinitely to enable the petitioner to obtain licence from the Panchayat. If there is any W.P.(C)No.34842/09 3 inaction on the part of the Panchayat or Pollution Control Board in the matter of giving licence to the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to seek appropriate direction against the Panchayat and the Pollution Control Board. In any event, I do not think that this Court can direct the 3rd respondent to wait indefinitely for their money. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.34842/09 4 W.P.(C)No.34842/09 5