IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9362 of 2010(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.C.ABDUL LATHEEF, VAYALIL HOUE, PARAPPAN POYIL P.O., THAMARASSERY-VIA., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA MR.MUJEEB RAHIMAN.S. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THEMARASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE THAMARASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THAMARASSERY P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THEMARASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH COMMIITTEE REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, OFFICE OF THE THAMARASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THAMARASSERY P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REP. BY ITS DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, 3RD FLOOR, ZAMORIN'S SQUARE, LINK ROAD, KOZHIKODE. *ADDL.R4. N.P.MUHAMMED, S/O.ABUBACKER, AGED 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT PUTHENTHERUVIL HOUSE, NEAR ROLEX CHEMICALS, P.O.THACHAMPOYIL, THAMARASSERY - 673 573, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. *ADDL.R5. C.ABDUL SALAM, S/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHALAKKARA, NEAR ROLEX CHEMICALS, P.O.THACHAMPOYIL, THAMARASSERY - 673 573, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. WPC NO.4520/2010 *ADDL.R6. M.ABBAS, S/O.IMBICHI ABDULLA, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT MALAYIL, PUTHENTHERUVIL, NEAR ROLEX CHEMICALS, P.O.THACHAMPOYIL, THAMARASSERY - 673 573, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. *(IMPLEADED ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 AS PER ORDER DATED 29/03/2010 IN I.A.NO.4520/2010) ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN,SC,POLLUTION CONT FOR R3 SRI.K.M.FIROZ FOR ADDL.R4-6 MR.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC FOR PCB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.9362 of 2010 (U) -------------------------- Dated, this the 29th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that he has established a small scale industry manufacturing soaps. The Panchayat had issued Ext.P1 licence, which is valid till 31/03/2010. By Ext.P6 proceedings, the licence was cancelled. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P7 appeal before the Committee of the Panchayat. Meanwhile, consequent to Ext.P6, the Secretary issued Ext.P8 requiring the petitioner to close down his unit. Against that order, he has filed Ext.P9 appeal as well, which is also pending before the Committee of the Panchayat. In the meantime, the petitioner apprehends coercive action based on Exts.P6 & P8, and it is on that basis, the writ petition has been filed. 2. I heard the learned counsel appearing for Additional respondents 4 to 6 also. 3. According to the learned counsel for Additional respondents 4 to 6, in view of the environmental pollution that is caused on account of the functioning of the petitioner's Unit, the Panchayat was justified in issuing Exts.P6 & P8. Irrespective of the WP(C) No.9362/2010 -2- complaints raised by Additional respondents 4 to 6, it is a fact that Exts.P7 & P9 appeals are filed by the petitioner invoking the appellate remedy available to him under Section 276 of the Panchayat Raj Act. These appeals, being statutory in nature, are liable to be considered by the appellate authority, the Committee of the Panchayat. 4. In view of this, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (1) That the Committee of the Panchayat shall, within three weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, consider Exts.P7 & P9 appeals filed by the petitioner against Exts.P6 & P8 orders. This shall be done with notice to the petitioner and Additional respondents 4 to 6. (2) In the meanwhile, it is directed that coercive action against the petitioner based on Exts.P6 & P8 will be kept in abeyance. The petitioner or Additional respondents 4 to 6 may produce a copy of this judgment before the Panchayat Committee for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE.