IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10942 of 2007(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.RAJENDRAN NAIR, S/O KRISHNAN NAIR, T.C.54/2285, RESHMAM, VISWAMBHARAN ROAD, PAPPANAMCODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.SIJU SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ENVIRONMENT ENGINEER, POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. MR.MANOJ KUMAR, T.C.54/2286, SREEKESH, VISWAMBHARAN ROAD, PAPPANAMCODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY NANDAKUMARA MENON (R1) BY SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS (R3) BY ADV. SRI.M.GEORGE THOMAS BY G.P. SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 10942 of 2007 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April , 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner complaining that the existence of the septic tank of the fourth respondent in close proximity to the well, where the petitioner is drawing drinking water, is contaminating the water in the well and that the first respondent is not taking any action. 2. The Pollution Control Board has filed a statement. It is stated that pursuant to the inspection conducted, the Pollution Control Board directed the fourth respondent on 27.3.2006 to shift the septic tank and soak pit to a distance of 10 meters from the petitioner's well and also directed the petitioner also to provide a pucca septic tank system since it was noticed that the petitioner's toilet was at the distance of only 8 meters from the well on the west side and that soak pit of the petitioner's toilet was not concreted at the bottom and the construction of the WPC No.10942/2007 2 same was not in a scientific manner. It is stated by the Pollution Control Board that though the fourth respondent responded to the letter issued by the Pollution Control Board and informed that he has constructed septic tank with permission from the Corporation the petitioner has not responded at all to the letter. 2. I have heard the submissions of Sri.Siju Kamalasanan the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.M.K.Chandramohan Das, the learned Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board and Sri.Manoj Kumar the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation and Sri.George Thomas the learned counsel for the fourth respondent. 3. Sri.George Thomas would submit that the fourth respondent has subsequently demolished the septic tank in deference to the directions given by the Pollution Control Board and has relocated the septic tank at a distance sufficiently away from the well of the petitioner. He submitted that the petitioner on the contrary is yet to abide by the directions given to him by the Pollution Control Board. The above submission is endorsed by Sri.Chandramohan Das. WPC No.10942/2007 3 4. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that , without going into the merits of the matter, this writ petition can be disposed of granting the following relief; The writ petitioner is directed to comply with all the directions given to him by the third respondent within one month from today and submit a report before the third respondent regarding compliance. Once the compliance report is received, the third respondent will conduct a further inspection with notice to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. During this inspection, the claim of the fourth respondent that he has already demolished septic tank and shifted the same to a safe distance will also be verified by the third respondent. Appropriate orders on the basis of the information revealed by the inspection will be passed by the third respondent and communicated to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE dpk WPC No.10942/2007 4