IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21009 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. KUNJUMON GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, KIZHAKKETHALAKKAL (PERAKATH), KAKKODE P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. C.N.PRASAD, KARIKKATHIL VEEDU, KAKKODE P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, PATHANAPURAM, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUNALUR POLICE STATION, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 5. THE PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 6. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM. 7. SRI.CHANDRAN, KURUMAKKAD VEEDU, KATTA CHOOLA, KAKKODE P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 8. SRI.RADHAAKRISHNAN @ SHAJI, NOVI COTTAGE (VANDANA), KAKKODE P.O,,PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 9. SRI.KOCHUPODIYAN, S/O.MARIA, C/O.CHANDRAN, KURUMAKKAD VEEDU, KATTA CHOOLA, KAKKODE P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM. BY GP V MANU ADV. SMT.K.K.THULASY BHAI,SC,POLLUTION C.BOA FOR R6 SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 21009 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2009 JUDGMENT This is an unfortunate case, where this court has to be moved to stop an illegal activity of a brick killen being carried out which, according to the Municipality is without even a DLO licence. Even the District Collector is alleged to have not taken any action in spite of repeated complaints by local people. Learned counsel for the Municipality states that the activity is going on and that no DLO licence was issued. It is accordingly submitted by the Municipality that action would follow immediately. Without expressing anything on merits and preserving the rights of the parties to work out remedies under appropriate statutory provisions, it is ordered that the Municipality and the District Collector will look into any complaint that petitioner has made and would act appropriately, in accordance with law, as is expected of Government servants in office. Writ petition ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/7/8