IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 35609 of 2009(U) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SABU PAUL, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.PAULOSE, KANNANGAYATH, MANEED VILLAGE, KAROOR KARA, PAZHOOR P.O., PIRAVOM. BY ADV. MR.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PIRAVOM. 3. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 4. A.P.JOY, EDACKATTU, PUTHANPURACKAL, PIRAVAM. 5. JOHN VARKEY, NELLICKAL, KAKKADU, PIRAVOM. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA, R4 & R5 BY MR.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. MR.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.35609/2009-U: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT DTD. 29/03/2001. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.335/07-08 DTD. 06/12/07. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE QUARRYING PERMIT NO.31/07-08/MM/BC/QP/DOE/396/E2/08 DTD. 05/02/08. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE DEALER'S LICENSE NO.53/09/MM/BC/DL/DEO/2055/E2/09 DTD. 29/10/09 VALID UPTO 31/03/2010. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE CHALAN DTD. 28/04/09. EXT.P.6: NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE FROM REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER NO.A9- 460/09/K. DIS. DTD. 24/01/09. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 01/12/09 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.2. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.PH 224/09-10 DTD. 01/10/09. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF SAID CONSENT NO.PCB/RO-EKM/ICO- BR42/F/09. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE REPORT ISSUED BY THE TAHASILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA DT. 22/01/09. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE SAID NO OBJECTION LETTER DT. 17/10/09. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R4.A: COPY OF THE MASS PETITION TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EKM AND RDO, MOOVATTUPUZHA DTD. 20/04/2009. EXT.R4.B: COPY OF THE MASS PETITION TO THE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 05/10/09. EXT.R4.C: COPY OF THE PETITION TO RDO MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 02/04/09. EXT.R4.D: COPY OF THE PETITION TO THE PIRAVOM PANCHAYATH DTD. 03/10/09. EXT.R4.E: COPY OF THE PETITION TO RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 13/11/2009. EXT.R4.F: COPY OF THE PETITION TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DTD. 30/11/09. EXT.R4.G: COPY OF THE PETITION TO THE S.I. OF POLICE, PIRAVOM DTD. 29/11/09. W.P.(C). NO.35609/2009-U: EXT.R4.H: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION WAS FILED BY THE R.5 TO THE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA AND THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, AGAINST THE ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES DONE BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 03/10/2009. EXT.R4.I: COPY OF THE STOP MEMO BY THE RDO DTD 25/11/2009 BY THE RDO. DTD. 25/11/09. EXT.R4.J: COPY OF THE LITHO MAP OF THE SUBJECT MATTER LOCALITY ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, PIRAVOM DTD. 15/12/2009. EXT.R4.K: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY R.5 BEFORE R.2. DTD. 19/12/2009. EXT.R4.L: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY R.5. BEFORE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EKM, INCLUDING THE FORWARDING ORDER BY COLLECTOR TO VILLAGE OFFICER, PIRAVOM DTD. 21/12/2009. EXT.R4.M: COPY OF THE HEARING NOTICE ISSUED BY RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. DECEMBER 2009. EXT.R4.N: COPY OF THE DETAILED NTOES SUBMITTED BY R5 BEFORE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 30/12/2009. EXT.R4.O: COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THANKACHAN THOTTATHIL & KURIAKOSE MANGALASSERIL TO THE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 10/01/2010. EXT.R4.P: COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, PIRAVOM GIVEN TO THE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 35609 of 2009 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Raman, J. In so far as the petitioner is doing business strictly in compliance with the conditions contained in the consent that are given by the R.D.O. dated 24-1-2009. Ext.P6 produced shall not be caused any obstruction for construction of bricks in the property in Sy. No.646/2 and in case there is any obstruction police will interfere and remove the same. It is open to the R.D.O. to visit the property and ensure that the consent letter given by him and conditions contained in Ext.P6 have not been violated in any manner and in case he finds any thing, he shall take necessary steps in this regard. The above order will in force, in so for as Ext.P6 is not valid in any manner by the R.D.O. and it is open to the parties to approach the appropriate authority. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. mn.