IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6902 of 2011(K) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JOSE P.D., S/O.DEVASSY, PEREPADAN HOUSE, PINDANI, MELOOR P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.R.REENA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE MELOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.MELOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 311. 2. SECRETARY, MELOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O.MELOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 311. 3. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REP. BY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, REGIONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR, PIN-680 002. R3 BY ADV.SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.6902 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 7th March, 2011 JUDGMENT After obtaining Ext.P1 licence from the first respondent Panchayat the petitioner had started a small establishment. Earlier, considering the fact that the pollution caused on account of the functioning of the establishment belonging to the petitioner, in S.T.No.3195/2010 the petitioner was imposed with a fine by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakudy. Taking note of the said circumstances, the first respondent Panchayat issued Ext.P3 notice to the petitioner requiring him to stop the functioning of the said unit and to produce a No Objection Certificate from the Pollution Control Board. Prior to that, evidently, as per Ext.P4 dated 1.11.2010 the Pollution Control Board has given certain instructions to the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner is that he has complied with all the instructions in Ext.P4. If the petitioner has already complied with all the instructions, it will be open to the petitioner to make a proper application before the Pollution Control Board to conduct an inspection to the premises in question and to issue necessary No Objection Certificate for the purpose of producing the same before the Panchayat in response to Ext.P3. The first respondent WP(C).No.6902/2011 2 Panchayat cannot be said to be acted arbitrarily or illegally especially, in the light of the fact that the petitioner has been fined by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chalakudy in S.T.No.3195/2010. It is taking into account the said aspect that the petitioner was asked to stop the working of the unit in question and to produce No Objection Certificate from the Pollution Control Board for the purpose of considering whether the order in Ext.P3 is to be made absolute or it should be revoked. I am of the view that Ext.P3 does not call for any interference. There is no scope for any judicial review. As observed earlier, it will be open to the petitioner, in case he had already complied with the instructions given by the Pollution Control Board, to get the premises inspected by the competent officers of the Pollution Control Board and to obtain a No Objection Certificate and then to request the first respondent Panchayat to revoke Ext.P3. Subject to the said observation, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // true copy // P.S. to Judge