IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 4524 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.R.ASHOK KUMAR, AGED 51, S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, R/AT MADAPPILLIL HOUSE, KADAKKADU NORTH, PANDALAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) SRI.P.Y.AHAMMED PHYSI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, PALLICKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PAZHAKKULAM, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ FOR R1 SRI.SAJJU.S FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 4524 OF 2010 (M) ===================== Dated this the 1st day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's prayer is that Ext.P5 application made by him for licence to operate a quarry should be directed to be considered by the Panchayat. 2. However, standing counsel for the Panchayat referring to Ext.R1A submits that Ext.P5 is only a representation and is not an application in the form prescribed for applying for D & O licence. When this was pointed out, counsel for the petitioner submits that on receipt of Ext.R1A, proper application form along with required documents has been submitted. 3. If as asserted by the counsel for the petitioner, a proper application has been submitted, there is no reason why the Panchayat shall not consider the said application. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on any application made by the petitioner in the proper form, in response to Ext.R1A. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within 4 WPC No. 4524/10 :2 : weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp