IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33583 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- N.K.ASHRAF HASSAN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. HASSAN, SHARAFA, KOTTAI, NEDUMBASSERY.P.O. ALWAYE, ERNAKULAM DIST. KERALA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.MOHAMMED YOUSUFF, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF SMT.MOLLY JACOB SMT.RABIA BEEGUM T.K. SRI.JOBI.A.THAMPI SMT.M.KABANI DINESH RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,FOREST & WILDLIFE DEPT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 2. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, (WILDLIFE) VAZHUTHAKAD, TRIVANDRUM-695014. 3. CHIEF WILDLIFE WARDEN, KERALA FOREST DEPARTMENT, VAZHUTHAKKAD, TRIVANDRUM-695014. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.33583 OF 2010(W) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an Indian Businessman living in Dubai. He claims to be a bird lover. According to the petitioner without realizing the requirement of a licence issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade, on the strength of Exts.P1 and P1(a) he had brought with him certain love birds. It is stated that for want of import licence the authorities at the Calicut Airport did not release the birds and as a result of which the birds were sent back to Dubai. It is stated that on reaching Dubai, on the allegation that the birds landed in Dubai without the required documents, the birds are detained in the Quarantine Office there. 2. Thereupon the petitioner decided to apply for import licence. It is stated that as per the import policy, recommendation of the Chief Wild Life Warden, the 3rd respondent, is necessary and therefore the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 application to the 3rd respondent for the issuance of a non objection certificate. Orders have not been passed. Therefore he made Ext.P6 representation to the 2nd respondent also. Even to Ext.P6 there WPC.No.33583 /2010 :2 : has not been no response and it is complaining of delay on the part of respondents 2 and 3 in dealing with his request and also pointing out that the birds are in danger that the writ petition is filed. 3. Thus it is obvious that as part of the import policy, the petitioner has to obtain a non-objection from the 3rd respondent to apply for import licence. It was therefore that he made Ext.P5. At this stage, since orders have not been passed on Ext.P5, what is required is that the 3rd respondent should pass orders thereon. 4. Having regard to the above, without expressing anything on the merits of the claim raised, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 3rd respondent to pass orders on Ext.P5, which shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. 5. Petitioner is directed to produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 3rd respondent. It is made clear that it will be open to the petitioner to produce any additional materials that he may have in support of Ext.P5. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/