IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 7453 of 2008(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SINU M.GEORGE, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, RESIDING AT MEENKUZHICKAL HOUSE, OLIYAPPURAM KARA, THIRUMARADY, ERNAKULAM DIST, CHAIRMAN, THIRUMARADY EDAPRAKAVU KAKKOOR AMBASHARIKAVU TEMPLE FESTIVAL CELEBRATION - 2008. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.C.S.DIAS SRI.K.JOSE KURIAKOSE SMT.R.BEENA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT OF FOREST, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL (AHF) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 030. 5. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. 6. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 030. 7. ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, ERNAKULAM. WP(C) 7453/08 -2- 8. THIRUMARADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUMARADY ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI M.R.SABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 7453 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: MARCH 4, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the Chairman of the Organizing Committee for celebrating the Kakkoor Kalavayal - Karshikamela 2008 being held in connection with the Thirumarady Edaprakavu Kakkoor Ambasharikavu Temple Festival. According to the petitioner, for conducting the above event, they require permission from the 7th respondent who has made it known that in view of Exts.P2 to P4 orders issued following the Supreme Court's order in SLP 11686/07, he will not grant permission. It is in this background this writ petition has been filed. 2. Petitioner has produced Ext.P5, the Supreme Court's order dated 15.1.2008, modifying its earlier orders and permitting an event similar to what is proposed to be conducted by the petitioner. On this basis it is contended that Exts.P2 to P4 orders relied on to deny permission are no longer of any relevance. 3. Having considered the matter, I am inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is true that prior to Ext.P5 WP(C) 7453/08 Page numbers the Supreme Court had passed an order dated 27.7.2007 and that order was declined to be vacated by its order dated 11.1.2008. However, on a subsequent application, the earlier orders were modified by Ext.P5 and the event mentioned therein was permitted to be conducted subject to the conditions that are incorporated therein. In view of Ext.P5, if an application is received from the petitioner, the 7th respondent has to consider the same in the light of Ext.P5 and pass orders thereon. With this direction the writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-