IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 11TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23107 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S.SHILPY WOOD LINKS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, SHILPY MANSION, UGRAPURAM POST, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE AREACODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM-673639, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NILAMBOOR NORTH DIVISION, NILAMBOOR, MALAPPURAM-679329. 3. ADDL.R3- STATE EMPOWER COMMITTEE, THE OFFICE OF CHIEF FOREST CONSERVATOR, SPECIAL AFORESTATION,VAZHUTHAKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 02.09.11 IN IA 14427/11) SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASHREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.23107/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 27.4.1999. EXT.P2: TRU COPY OF THE LICENCE DT 8.11.2006 EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DT 7.4.09. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DT 28.2.199O. EXT.P5: TREU COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DT 20.3.2007. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 4.4.11. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.4.11. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION DT 16.4.11. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 23107 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner, a Company has established a wood seasoning factory using rubber wood as the raw material. Ext.P1 is the Panchayat licence obtained in 1999, which has been renewed subsequently. Similarly, Ext.P4 NOC issued by the Divisional Forest Officer also is in 1990. While so, petitioner submitted application to the additional 3rd respondent for NOC and Ext.P7 is the verification report, which also suggests that the unit has been established prior to 30/10/2002. In the meanwhile, apprehending that the unit will be ordered to be closed for want of NOC issued by the additional 3rd respondent, this writ petition has been filed. 2. Prima facie, on the materials available, it is seen that the unit has been in existence prior to 30/10/2002. For that reason and also taking note of the fact that the application made for NOC is pending consideration of the additional 3rd respondent, I am inclined to think that, at this stage, there is no necessity to close down the factory. 3. Therefore, I direct that the additional 3rd respondent WPC No. 23107/11 :2 : will consider the application made by the petitioner for NOC in the light of the verification report and other documents. Until orders are passed and communicated to the petitioner, status quo as on date in so far as the functioning of the unit will be allowed to continue, provided however that the activities in the unit shall be confined to what is permissible in terms of the licence issued by the Panchayat. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp