IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2011 / 5TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 13435 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. KRISHNAPILLAI, AGED 78 YEARS S/O. AYYAPPAN KUTTY, VADAKKEDATH HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM.P.O. VYPIN. 2. SANTHOSH, S/O. PARAMU, AGED 40 YEARS, MULLUVATHUKKALTHARA HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM.P.O, VYPIN. 3. MOHANAN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDAN, VALAPPIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM.P.O, VYPIN. BY ADV.MRI.A.X.VARGHESE MR.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. NAYARAMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, NAYARAMBALAM - 682 509. 2. THE HEALTH INSPECTOR, NAYARAMBALAM PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, PUTHEN KADAPPURAM, NAYARAMBALAM.P.O, NAYARAMBALAM, PIN - 682 509. 3. RAJU, S/O. PAPPACHAN, ADAMPADATH HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM.P.O, VYPIN, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 509. ADV. MR.K.B.GANGESH FOR R3 MR.LAL K.JOSEPH FOR R1 MR.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R1 MR.V.S.SHIRAZ BAVA FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13435 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE SOLID WASTE OUTLET AND THE PUBLIC WATER TAP. EXT.P2: REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE R1 DTD. 23.3.2011. EXT.P3: REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE R2 DTD. 23.3.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a): APPLICATION DTD. 30.5.2011 EXT.R1(b): COMMUNICATION DTD. 10.6.2011. ...... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.13435 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed for a direction directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation, pass appropriate orders thereon and for a direction directing respondents 1 & 2 to ensure appropriate treatment of the waste generated from the business of the 3rd respondent and to ensure healthy atmosphere in the area covered by Exts.P2 & P3 representation. 2. Petitioners are the residents of Ward No.2 of Nayarambalam Grama Panchayath. It is averred in the writ petition that the 3rd respondent is conducting a poultry farm and has engaged in the sale of chicken. It is also averred that the southern boundary of the property of the third respondent is a thodu lying on the east-west direction, that the solid waste and filthy water from the poultry farm of the 3rd respondent are deposited in the said thodu and the said conduct of the 3rd respondent is causing severe pollution problems to the persons residing in the nearby area. It is also pointed out that there is no ::2:: W.P.(C).No.13435 Of 2011 flow of water in the thodu wherein the 3rd respondent discharges the solid waste which caused bad smell and is also causing severe threat to the health of the petitioners and others residing in the neighbourhood. In these circumstances, the petitioner sought for consideration of mass petitions presented to the Panchayath produced as Exts.P2 & P3. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Panchayath referred to paragraphs 3 & 4 of the statement. It is stated that the 3rd respondent has submitted an application for grant of licence for conducting a poultry farm. On receipt of the application for permit, the Panchayah made enquiries through the Health Inspector, Nayarambalam Primary Health Centre, who is the 2nd respondent herein. The 2nd respondent reported that the facilities already in existence is not sufficient for ensuring lack of nuisance to the local people and he has suggested some remedial measures which is a condition precedent for granting the licence. The 1st respondent also noticed the fact that the shed in which the 3rd respondent proposed to conduct the poultry farm does not have any building number. Subsequently, the Panchayath ::3:: W.P.(C).No.13435 Of 2011 verified whether the remedial measures has been carried out by the 3rd respondent. It was found that the 3rd respondent did not undertook any remedial measures as suggested by the Health Inspector. For the aforesaid reasons the Panchayath do not propose to issue licence for the conduct of the poultry farm. The Panchayath also noticed that several complaints from the local people has been received stating that in case the permit is granted it will result in serious health hazards to the people of the area. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, the Panchayath decided not to grant licence to the 3rd respondent. The said fact was communicated to the 3rd respondent. Ext.R1(b) is the communication. 4. In the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioners are not entitled to the reliefs sought for in the writ petition. The petitioners submitted that in spite of the fact that the Panchayath rejected the grant of permit, still the 3rd respondent is conducting the farm without licence. If the 3rd respondent is conducting the poultry farm unauthorisedly and without licence, the Panchayath shall take immediate steps for ::4:: W.P.(C).No.13435 Of 2011 closure of the poultry farm and shall pass appropriate orders to close down the poultry farm immediately. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-