IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10183 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.A.JOHNSON, S/O. ABRAHAM, AGED 40 YEARS, MADATHANAKATH,PERUVANNAMUZHI POST, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, CHAKKITTAPARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.N.SUDHA DEVI FOR R1 ADV. SRI.O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SMT.K.RADHAMANI AMMA FOR R2 SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN (THYKOODAM) FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.10183/10 PETITONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL BOARD. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE PRODUCTS OF M.TECH ELECTRO DIGITAL INDUSTRY WHICH DESCRIBES THE ADVANTAGE OF THE PRODUCT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED6.8.08. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED NOTICE DATED 14.1.10 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: NEWS ITEM REGARDING THE HARDSHIPS METED OUT IN GETTING D&O LICENCE FROM THE PANCHAYAT PUBLISHED IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 11.3.10. TRUE COPY T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.10183 of 2010 --------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner sought for a D&O licence under the Panchayat Raj (Licensing of Dangerous and Offensive Trade and Factories)Rules, 1996 for running an industrial unit. The petitioner is a physically handicapped person having 75% disability. His disability comes under the category of locomotor disability and he is not in a position to move around without the help of others. The petitioner wanted to have licence for a unit, namely M.Tech Electro Digital Industry. It is accordingly that he filed an application before the Panchayat. 2. The petitioner has set apart a room in his house, bearing No.C.P.XII/453 for running the Unit. The Secretary of the Panchayat as per Exhibit P4 informed the petitioner that no such licence can be issued when the industrial unit which is proposed to be conducted is in one part of the W.P.(C)No.10183/10 -2- residential building itself. A reading of Exhibit P4 shows that the Secretary has only reproduced the relevant rules and has not considered the application on merits. The petitioner contends that the Unit, even if it is located in one part of the residential house, that may not create any problem for the inmates of the house also. It is submitted that the petitioner cannot move out from the residential house and therefore unless the same is located in one part of the residential house itself, he will not be able to manage the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Central Act, viz, Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation)Act, 1995 directs the local authorities to provide aids and appliances to persons with disabilities. Therefore, the same ought to have been considered by the Panchayat. The petitioner's remedy is to approach the Panchayat Committee itself by way of representation/appeal. W.P.(C)No.10183/10 -3- 3. Since the petitioner is aggrieved by Exhibit P4, he has to approach the Committee of the Panchayat itself for reconsideration of the matter. If the petitioner files appropriate representation within a period of three weeks along with a copy of this judgment, the Committee of the Panchayat will conduct due enquiries and take appropriate decision within a further period of six weeks. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn