IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 4392 of 2011(Y) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- MURALEEDHARAN .N.B. @ MURALI N.B., AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN, NARAYANATHARA HOUSE, NARAYANATHARA DESOM, CHOOLISSERY P.O., KUTTOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.K.P.SHAMEENA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 2. STATE EMPLOWERED COMMITTEE, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD, TRIVANDRUM-14, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, OFFICE OF DFO, THRISSUR. 4. KOLAZHI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOLAZHI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUR, M.G.KAVU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.4392 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 21st February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The grievance of the petitioner is that there is callous inaction on the part of the respondents with regard to the issuance of "No Objection Certificate" by the Forest Department for enabling the petitioner to run the unit involving interior designing works, manufacturing of kitchen cab, TV cab etc. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P (C) No.2717/2010 which was disposed of directing the concerned Panchayat to consider the application for issuance of license. Pursuant to the verdict passed by this Court, the matter was considered by the Panchayat; but the petitioner was informed that, for granting the license necessary "No Objection Certificate " issued by the Forest Department was necessary. This made the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent by filing Ext.P6 application, which is sought to be acted upon. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits on instructions that, quite a number of W.P (C) No. 4392 of 2011 2 applications are pending before the 2nd respondent and that the matters could be finalised for further steps only with respect to the applications till 30.11.2009. It is however added that, earnest efforts are being taken to finalise the proceedings at the earliest. 3. In the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P6 application, if the same is otherwise proper and in order and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. However, taking note of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 4th respondent is taking steps to demolish the unit of the petitioner , though no manufacturing operations are pursued therein, there will be a direction to keep all further proceedings in relation to the demolition of the building in abeyance, till the matter is considered by the 2nd respondent as aforesaid. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANCDRA MENON, JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge