IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 36422 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ KUNJU PENNU, W/O.SANKARAN, 60 YEARS, PLAVILA HOUSE, VAKKANAD, KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN SRI.S.JAYAKUMAR (PANAMBIL) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. GEOLOGIST, OFFICE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KOLLAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM 3. V.JYOTHI KUMAR, NARIYIDACHARUVILA HOUSE KUDAVATTUR, VELIYAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI FOR R3 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 36422 OF 2008 (J) ==================== Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The complaint of the petitioner is regarding the blasting conducted by the 3rd respondent in a property which the petitioner says is adjacent to her. According to her, the 3rd respondent has resorted to such activities without obtaining any licence and that Exts.P2 and P3 complaints made by the petitioner to respondents 1 and 2 were also not responded. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition was filed praying for compelling the respondents to interfere in this matter. 2. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit producing Ext.R3(a) permit. It is also stated that there were several litigations between the parties before the Civil Court. The 3rd respondent in the counter affidavit has also stated that the residence of the petitioner is situated about 60 metres away from the blasting site and that she has been set up by interested parties. 3. Irrespective of the controversies that have been raised by both sides in this writ petition, what I notice from Ext.R3(a) is that the period of Ext.R3(a) has expired on 9/1/2009. It is stated that an application for its renewal has been made and that it is being considered WPC 36422/08 :2 : by the 1st respondent pursuant to the orders passed by this Court. 4. Now that the application for renewal is made and as the petitioner has raised complaints about the blasting, I direct the 1st respondent to consider the objections of the petitioner also as and when a decision on the application for renewal is taken. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp