IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32706 of 2008(R) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- N.J.JAMES, MANAGING PARTNER, NEERAKKAL GRANITES, MUTHOLAPURAM, ELANJI (VIA), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE PRESIDENT, ELANJI PANCHAYAT, ELANJI.P.O, ERNAKULAM-686665. 2. THE ELANJI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, ELANJI REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. P.A.JOSEPH, OLICKAL HOUSE, MONIPPALLI.PO KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.P. RAMAKRISHNAN FOR R1 AND R2 SRI. BIJI MATHEW FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2008, ALONG WITH 26540/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C)No.32706 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T Adv.P.Ramakrishnan takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Adv. Biji Mathew takes notice on behalf of the 3rd respondent. The petitioner in the writ petition intends to start a crusher unit in his property. The petitioner has filed an application for licence in respect of the same. The grievance of the petitioner is that the application for licence is not being considered by the 2nd respondent - Panchayat. The standing counsel for the Panchayat would submit that the application for licence is not being considered because of the pendency of the W.P.(C)No. 26540/2008 filed by the 3rd respondent in respect of the establishment of the unit. I have today disposed of the said writ petition and as such there cannot be any objection in considering the application filed by the petitioner for licence. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent also. W.P(C)No.32706 of 2008 - 2 - In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application for licence stated to have been submitted by the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs