IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2010 / 27TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 19496 of 2004(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- R.GOPAKUMAR, REVATHI BHAVAN, PADINJATTINKARA, E.T.C. P.O., KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.LEGY ABRAHAM SRI.C.N.SIVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO HEALTH DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF RADIATION SAFETY, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKODE. 3. DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, KOLLAM. 4. THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR, CHINNAKADA, KOLLAM. 5. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KOTTARAKKARA. 6. THOMAS P.VARGHESE, RED CROSS MEDICAL CENTRE, NEAR GOVT.HOSPITAL, KOTTARAKKARA. 7. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIGILANCE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SC, KSEB FOR R5 SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R6 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.DILEEP MOHAN FOR R1 & R5 TO R7 SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R.5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.19496/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT TO CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA BY THE PETITIONER DT.27.9.03. EXT.P1(a): TRUE TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1 FROM MALAYALAM TO ENGLISH. EXTS. OF R5. EXT.R5(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.2937/2003/EIQ DT 15.12.2003 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.R5(b): TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER IN O.P.NO.376/03 PASSED BY THE C.D.R.F. KOLLAM DT 25.2.2004. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 19496 OF 2004 (U) ===================== Dated this the 19th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T In this writ petition, petitioner complains of the Red Cross Medical Center run by the 6th respondent. The case of the petitioner is that the 6th respondent has not taken any action for preventing radiation and that the 6th respondent is working without necessary licence. 2. In the statement filed by the official respondents, it is seen that it was on account of the pendency of the Rent Control Petition filed by the landlord of the premises occupied by the 6th respondent that the certificate from the Directorate of Radiation Safety was not issued. However, counsel for the party respondents has produced in court a certificate that was subsequently issued subject to the outcome of the Rent Control Petition. It is also the case of the party respondents that subsequently the Rent Control Petition was also decided in his favour. 3. In the light of these facts, the contention raised does not appear to be having any basis. In any case, having regard to WPC No. 19496/04 :2 : the long pendency of this writ petition and as the petitioner also did not take any earnest steps for seeking orders in the writ petition by moving the same, at this distance of time, I do not think it necessary for this Court to enter into the controversies raised. However, it is clarified that if the petitioner has any grievance regarding the inadequacies in the functioning of the unit of the 6th respondent, it will be open to the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the 3rd respondent, the District Medical Officer, Kollam, who on receipt of any such complaint, shall take appropriate action in the matter. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp