IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2008 / 6TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25478 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M.MUTHUKUMAR, PROPRIETOR, SREE VENKITACHALAPATHY AGENCIES, T.C.43/341. BALAVAN NAGAR, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.DIPU.R SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.S.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE HEALTH OFFICER, CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM, CORPORATION OFFICE, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. 4. KERALA LOKAYUKTA, LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 5. K.G.SURENDRAN, ACTION COUNCIL CONVENOR, T.C.43/483/2, GANESOM BHAVAN, K.B.A.C. LANE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. PRIYASAMBATH, SUMANGALIBHAVAN, T.C.43/345/1, GANGA NAGAR, KAMALESWARAM, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. B.S.RAJENDRAN, BHASKARA BHAVAN, T.C.43/345, GANGA NAGAR, KAMALESWARAM, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.K.K.THULASY BHAI,SC,POLLUTION C.BOARD FOR R3 R1 & R2 BY S.C. MR. P.K. MANOJKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 25478 OF 2008 G = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28th day of August 2008 J U D G M E N T Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the Corporation. 2. The controversy in this writ petition is regarding a bakery belonging to the petitioner in respect of which Exts. P8, P11 and P11(a) notices have been issued by the Corporation and the Upa Lok Ayukta respectively. Ext. P8 is a notice issued by the Health Officer of the Corporation stating that the petitioner is using a heavy motor having a capacity of 22 H.P. without authorisation. By Exts. P11 and P11(a), the petitioner has been asked to close down the bakery. 3. Though the petitioner has contentions regarding the invalidity of the aforesaid proceedings after the writ petition the Corporation has permitted the petitioner to remove the perishable articles which were available in the bakery in question. Therefore the request to permit its removal has been infructuous. W.P.(C) No. 25478 OF 2008 -2- 4. Now the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has decided to temporarily shift his unit to an industrial estate and therefore he wants to remove his machineries and other equipments. On considering this submission made by the counsel for the petitioner I am not satisfied that there could be any objection for the removal of the machineries and other equipments from the premises. Therefore, it is clarified that it will be open to the petitioner to remove the machineries and other equipments from the premises mentioned in Exts. P8, P11 and P11(a). 5. In addition to this the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wants to carry out the repair works in the premises in order to rectify the defects pointed out by the Pollution Control Board so that licence could be sought for reviving the activities in the premises. This also he will be free to do. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: 1) That the petitioner will be free to remove the machineries and other equipments and perishable articles, if any, from the premises in question. 2) That the petitioner will not be permitted to continue any W.P.(C) No. 25478 OF 2008 -3- manufacturing activities in the premises until otherwise permitted by the statutory authorities. 3) Petitioner will be allowed to continue repair works in the premises so that he could take steps for regularisation of the construction, obtain consent and other licences and if he so chooses, can revive manufacturing activities in the premises in question. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-