IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17530 of 2011(M) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- NAJUMUDHEEN,S/O.SHOUKATH ALI, KUZHINTHADATHIL VEEDU,KIZHAKKUMBHAGOM MURI, MANKODE VILLAGE,KOTTARAKKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE TAHSILDAR,TALUK OFFICE,KOTTARAKARA - 690 021. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.HANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 17530/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE CHITHARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER ON 25/06/2010. P2: COPY OF THE CONSENT DATED 14/06/2010 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM. P3: COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ON 10/08/2010. P4: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT 20/09/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.17530 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Grievance of the petitioner is that he sought renewal of Ext.P3 permit and that orders were not passed by the respondent. Learned Government Pleader has obtained instruction in the matter. According to the learned Government Pleader on submission of the application for renewal, the petitioner was called upon to produce licence issued by the Panchayat and the same was not produced. It is stated that it was therefore the application could not be considered. 2. On the other hand learned counsel for the petitioner submits that along with the application he had in fact produced Ext.P1, a copy of the licence obtained from the Panchayat. 3. However, there is no material to prove that Ext.P4 application made by the petitioner for renewal of the permit was accompanied by Ext.P1. Even otherwise, the period of W.P(C) No.17530 of 2011 2 Ext.P1 has already expired. Therefore, at this stage, even if Ext.P1 is submitted afresh, that will not improve the case of the petitioner. 4. Be that as it may, taking note of the submission made by the petitioner the application for renewal of Ext.P1 is pending before the Panchayat, it is ordered that if the petitioner obtains a licence from Panchayat and produce the same before the respondent, the respondent will thereupon consider Ext.P4 application for renewal of Ext.P3 permit and pass orders thereon. 5. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of production of renewed licence. The Writ Petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE