IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 14855 of 2009(B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. SOMASEKHARAN UNNITHAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN UNNITHAN, AGED 59, VADAVOOR VEEDU, PUNUKKANNOOR, PERUMPUZHA, KOLLAM (DISTRICT). 2. ABDUL SALAM, SHABANA MANZIL, PUNUKKANNOOR, PERUMPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. PRADEEP S.V., PULIVILAVEEDU, PUNUKKANNOOR, PERUMPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. ANITHA KUMARI, MADHAVA MANDIRAM, PUNUKKANNOOR, PERUMPUZHA, KOLLAM. 5. NJETTAYIL ELAVIKASANA SAMITHI, REG.NO.Q 481/06, PUNUKKANNOOR, PERUMPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PODIYAN. 6. KULAPPRA PADASEKHARA NELLULPADAKA SAMITHI, REG.NO.Q 569/08, PUNUKKANNOOR, PERUMPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY JAYAKUMARAN UNNITHAN. BY ADV. MR.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) MR.P.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KOTTAMKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH (SPECIAL GRADE), T.K.M.C P.O., KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM, AMARJYOTHI BUILDING, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. WP(C).No. 14855 of 2009(B) 3. A.SHAJAHAN, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, KANJIYIL THEKKATHIL VEEDU, CHATHINAMKULAM, CHANDANATHOPPU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. R2 BY ADV. SMT.K.K.THULASY BHAI,SC,POLLUTION C.BOARD R1 BY SRI.M.V.THAMBAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 14855 of 2009(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a): COPY OF THE GRANTING LICENSE TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R1(b): COPY OF THE DETAILED REPLY WAS GIVEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT'S WIFE ON 22/06/2009. EXT.R1(c): COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH. EXT.R1(d): COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER PRODUCED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(A): COPY OF THE CONSENT TO ESTABLISH DATED 19/03/2009. EXT.R2(B): COPY OF THE CONSENT OPERATE DATED 19/06/2009. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 14855 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioners contend that respondents 1 and 2 are permitting the third respondent to run a service station without complying with the formalities and this results in danger to life of the people in the locality. On receipt of notice, first respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that licence was granted to the third respondent. It is also pointed out that the third respondent has No Objection Certificate from the Pollution Control Board and clearance from the Fire Safety Authority. The automobile workshop of the third respondent is accordingly functioning. While the third respondent panchayat disputes the stand of the petitioners that the third respondent automobile workshop is in the midst of paddy field, panchayat committee has issued certain directions to the Secretary, who in turn has issued a notice to which the third respondent is also party. These matters are disclosed by the counter affidavit and documents produced therewith. With such materials, it is improper for this Wpc 14855/2009 2 court to further entertain the complaint of the petitioners. If they have any subsisting grievance, it is for them to approach the panchayat and raise it before the panchayat concludes the proceedings initiated against the third respondent. Needless to say, the availability of alternate remedies under those circumstances, would be sufficient for the petitioners to further ventilate their grievance, if there exists any. Writ petition is hence dismissed without entering on merits. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/12/10