IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 19075 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- CHACKO VARKEY ALIAS A.V.JACOB, ADAMANAPPATTU HOUSE, UPPUTHARA, PROPRIETOR, WESTERN WOOD INDUSTRIES, UPPUTHARA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND WILD LIFE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 3. CONVENER, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR WOOD BASED INDUSTRIES, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BENNY VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2011 ALONG WITH W.P.( C) No. 8188 OF 2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 19075 of 2009(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF RE GISTRATION DAT3ED 26.09.1986 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, THODUPUZHA EXT.P2 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF TRHE LICENCE DATED 05.09.1986 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE SECRETARY , UPPUTHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P3 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LICENCE DATED 07.04.2006 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE SECRET ARY, UPPUTHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P4 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE 09.07.1998 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE SECRET ARY, UPPUTH EXT.P5 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.05.2005 IN W.P.(C) 1593 of 1999 OF THE HON'BLE COURT. EXTP6 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.10.2005 IN O.P.NO4537/1999 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 09.12.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 21.09.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE NEW DELHI EXT.P9 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 10.12.2008 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.06.2009 SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE R2(a) TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE DATE D 29.,04.2008 /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) Nos. 19075 OF 2009 & 8188 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 24th March, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are same in both these writ petitions. The first petition was necessitated to be filed by the petitioners seeking for a direction to be given to the third respondent to issue 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioners' Saw Mill after setting aside the condition No.1 in Ext. P9, which stipulates a minimum distance of 5 Kms for the location of the Petitioners' Unit from the Forest Area. Many a ground has been raised in the writ petition as to the non-sustainability of such a stipulation with regard to the operation of the unit. In the course of the proceedings, a 'Stop Memo' was issued, under which circumstance, the petitioners were constrained to approach this Court again by filing W.P.(C)No.8188 of 2011, wherein 'status quo' was ordered on 16.03.2011. W.P.(C) Nos. 19075 OF 2009 & 8188 OF 2011 2 2. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits, on instruction, that pursuant to the various representations before the Central Committee with regard to Condition No.1 of Ext. P9, the matter was considered by the Central Committee and the State Level Committee was permitted to take appropriate steps with regard to lifting of the said condition. However, in the course of further proceedings, the Central Committee itself has re-considered the matter and the said condition has been lifted and some other reasonable restrictions have been imposed and the proceedings have been let known to the State Level Committee. 3. The learned Government Pleader further submits that Ext. P10 preferred by the petitioners in W.P.(C) 19075 of 2009 will definitely be caused to be considered in the light of the above development and appropriate orders will be passed in the due course. 4. In the said circumstance, both the writ petitions are disposed of, directing the third respondent in W.P.(C) 19075 of W.P.(C) Nos. 19075 OF 2009 & 8188 OF 2011 3 2009 to consider Ext. P10 therein and pass appropriate orders, also taking note of the observations made by the Central Committee, which shall be done as expeditiously as possible. 5. In the above circumstance, status quo will continue till such orders are passed by the third respondent. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the third respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk