IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2007 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1928 WP(C).No. 3083 of 2007(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JACKSON JOSEPH, PROPRIETOR, COPPERFIELD PIPES, NIRMALA PLASTIC INDUSTRIES, THANIMATTOM, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SHRIKUMAR SRI.SREEJITH S.NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, AVOLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AVOLY P.O. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. R3. SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, ERNAKULAM. (ADDR.3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.1595/2007 DATED 14.2.2007) ADDL. R4. SOJAN JOSEPH, NADUTHOTTATHI. NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R5. P.K.OMANKUTTAN, PARAPPURATHU, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R6. JOSEPH MATHEW, PEECHAAATTU NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R7. MOHANAN P.K. PARAPPURATHU NEAR NIRMALA COLLGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R8. ZYRIAC T.VALAVIL COLLEGE ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R9. TIJU NINAN, K.KAYYALACKAKATHU, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R10. BEENA ALEX, YOHANNAN COTTAGE, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R11. V.P.JOY VETTUKATTIL, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R12. JAMES MICHLE, NAYCKAN PARAMBIL NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R13. JOHNY ADUPPOOR, ADUPPOOR HOUSE, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R14. K.J.JOSEPH, KURIKAYIL NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R15. SIBY SEBASTIAN, J.PULICKASSERY, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R16. CHANDRAN P.K. PARAPPURATHU COLLEGE JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R17. RAVI.P.K. PARAPPURATHU HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R18. SADASIVAN K.S., KUTTADU, HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R19. BEENA SHIBU, KUNNATHUKUDIYIL, HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R20. SHEENA VENU, KARTHIKA NIVAS, HOSTEL JUNCTION,MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R21. SUNIL VIJAYAN, PANDAN PARAYIL HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R22. ARUN K.S. KANIYIDATHIL HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R23. MOHANAN V.M. VENGACHUVATTIL HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R24. KUNJU C.K. CHARUVELIL, HOSTEL JUNCTION, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R25. RAMANAN T.R. THOYALIL, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R26. BABU.K., KARIMUNDACKAL, NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R27. A.T.MATHAI, ANAKKALIUNGAL, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R28. T.K.KESAVAN, THACHAMPURATHU, NEAR NIRMALA COLELGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. “ R26. SIJU JOSEPH, NADUTHOTTATHIL NEAR NIRMALA COLLEGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. (ADDL. R4 TO 29 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER JUDGMENT IN WPC) BY G.P. SMT.T.B.RAMANI BY ADV. SRI.R.RAGHUNANDANAN SRI.R.RAGHUNANDANAN SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN SMT.KEERTHI SOLOMON SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)NO. 3083 of 2007 ---------------------------------- Dated this 23rd day of February, 2007 JUDGMENT I.A. No.2776/2007 will stand allowed. The petitioners in the I.A are impleaded as additional respondents 4 to 29 in the writ petition. 2. I find force in the submission of Sri.G.Sreekumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P1 judgment of this court is binding on the first respondent Panchayat and the 3rd additional respondent - Pollution Control Board. But the learned Standing Counsel for the Panchayat would invite my attention to Section 13 (1) (b) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1966 and submit that the petitioner is operating his unit without obtaining any consent from the Panchayat and that it is generating pollution problems day and night and thereby resulting serious health hazards to the local public and that this was the situation under which Ext.P2(a) order was passed by the Panchayat. 2. While issuing notice on the writ petition even as I WPC No.3083/2007 2 granted the interim order, which was prayed for by the petitioner i.e. staying operation of Ext.P3 and P3(a), I directed specifically that the petitioner shall comply with the condition No. 3 in Ext.P3(a) i.e. the condition that consent from the Pollution Control Board shall be obtained. Sri.G.Sreekumar submits that application for consent is being filed before the Pollution Control Board. 3. Having regard to the submissions addressed before me by Sri.G. Sreekumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.P.V. Jayachandran, the learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 29 and Sri.M.K.Chandramohan Das, the learned Standing Counsel for the pollution Control Board, I am of the view that the interim order presently passed can be permitted to continue till such time as the Pollution Control Bord takes a decision on the application for consent, which will be submitted by the petitioner within two weeks from today. If the Pollution Control Board receives such application for consent from the petitioner within two weeks from today, the Pollution Control Board will after conducting necessary enquiries, hear the petitioner, a representative of the additional respondents 4 to 29 and take a WPC No.3083/2007 3 decision. It is needless to mention that if the Board is inclined to issue consent, directions regarding necessary safeguards and pollution control measures will be incorporated in the consent and all those directions will be very faithfully complied with by the petitioner. Sri. G. Sreekumar submits that Pollution Control Board should be directed to give sufficient time to the petitioner for providing the pollution control measures which may be directed by the Board, I am of the view that even otherwise the pollution Control Board will give reasonable time for complying with the directions regarding the pollution control measures. Continuation of the status quo order as already ordered by this court on 25.1.2007 will be subject to the orders to be passed by the Pollution Control Board. The Pollution Control Board will take a decision on the consent application at the earliest and at any rate within six weeks of receiving such application. Necessary local inspection will be conducted by the Pollution Control Board within seven days of receiving the consent application. The inspection will be conducted with notice to the representative of the additional respondents 4 to 29 and the first respondent Panchayat apart from the petitioner. The representative of the additional respondents and the Panchayat WPC No.3083/2007 4 shall have the liberty of convincing the engineers of the Pollution Control Board of genuine hardship, If any, being caused to them due to the operation of the unit. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE Judge dpk