IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 21ST APRIL 2009 / 1ST VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 12484 of 2009(E) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ----------------------- M/S. MALLELIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., ATTACHAKKAL.P.O, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, R. SREEDHARAN NAIR. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI RESPONDENT : --------------------- KONNI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KONNI.P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) SMT. R. BINDU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.12484 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that they are running a quarry, a crusher and a hollow bricks manufacturing unit, in respect of which, Ext.P7 series of licences were issued by the respondent Panchayat. According to them, later, they were issued Ext.P8 order prohibiting the quarrying operations, which was subject matter of Appeal No.627/2008 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. The appeal was rejected by Ext.P9 order of the Tribunal, inter alia, directing that it will be open to the petitioner to apply for permit and licence as required under Section 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. Aggrieved by Ext.P9, the petitioner has filed WP(C) No.5341/2009 before this Court and the said writ petition is pending. 2. In the meanwhile, it is stated that the petitioner has filed Ext.P10 series of applications to the Panchayat for issue of licences, and in this writ petition, what is sought for is a direction to the Panchayat to consider the applications so made, in the light of Ext.P9 WP(C) No.12484/2009 -2- order passed by the Tribunal, and pass orders thereon. 3. If as stated by the petitioner, Exts.P10, P10(a) and P10(b) applications have been received and are pending, there is no reason why the Panchayat should not consider the said applications and pass orders thereon. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondent Panchayat shall consider Exts.P10, P10(a) and P10(b) applications made by the petitioner, in the light of Ext.P9 order passed by the Tribunal, with notice to the objectors, if any, and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the respondent Panchayat for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg