IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 11069 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOSE P.D., S/O.DEVASSY, PEREPADAN HOUSE, PINDANI, MELOOR P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REP. BY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, REGIONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR. 2. THE MELOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.MELOOR, THRISSUR DIST. ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS,SC,POLL.C.BOAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ....................... W.P.(C).11069/2011 ....................... Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT The industrial Unit started by the petitioner on the basis of the licence issued by the second respondent Panchayat was subsequently instructed to be closed down by issuing a 'stop memo' as to the functioning of the Unit and to produce a No Objection Certificate from the first respondent, Pollution Control Board. 2. The Pollution Control Board had in fact served a notice upon the petitioner seeking to carry out certain requirements to make it within the permissible limits which is stated as complied with by the petitioner, despite which, the NOC was never issued, which made him to approach this Court by filing W.P.(C).6902/2011. After hearing both the sides, the said writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P5 judgment making it clear that it will be open for the petitioner, if he has already complied with the instructions given by the Pollution Control Board, to have the premises inspected by the competent authority and to get a No Objection Certificate W.P.(C).11069/2011 2 enabling the Unit to function thereafter. The case of the petitioner is that in spite of complying with the requirements in toto and approaching the Pollution Control Board by filing Ext.P6, the Unit is still to be inspected, which made him to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent as well. 4. Taking note of the limited relief now pressed for and proposed to be given, this Court does not find it necessary to issue notice to the second respondent for the time being. 5. The writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to inspect the Unit of the petitioner with notice within three weeks and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within one week thereafter. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge mrcs