IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 573 of 2011(V) ------------------------ PETITIONER: --------------- C.A.FRANCIS,AGED 90 YEARS, S/O. LATE C.P.ANTONY, CHETTUPUZHAKARAN HOUSE, 1/272, AYYANTHOLE.P.O., THRISSUR-680003. BY ADV. MR.T.J.LAKSHMANAN IYER MR.K.N.ABHILASH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001. 3. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THRISSUR. CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001. 4. MAYOR, CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001 5. DIRECTOR, URBAIN AFFAIR, TRIVANDURM. PIN-695001. 6. VIJI DIAS, W/O. E.D.DIAS, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT AT 1/275, EDAKALATHUR HOUSE, AYYANTHOSE, THRISSUR-680003. ADV. MR.K.P.VIJAYAN FOR R2-4 MR.V.M.SYAM KUMAR FOR R2-4 MR.MUHAMMED SHAFI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 & 5 MS.KRIPA ELIZABETH MATHEWS FOR R2-4 MR.V.N.HARIDAS FOR R2-4 MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R6 MR.B.PREMOD FOR R6 MR.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) FOR R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 573 of 2011(V) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TREATMENT RECORD OF THE PETITIONER'S WIFE. EXT.P2: ORDER DTD. 29.1.2009 PASSED BY R5. EXT.P3: ORDER DTD.26.2.2009 PASSED BY R3 DIRECTING TO CLOSE DOWN THE GODOWN RUN BY R6. EXT.P4: ORDER DTD. 9.2.2009 PASSED BY THE LOK AYUKTHA. EXT.P5: ORDER DTD. 13.3.2009. EXT.P6: JUDGMENT DTD.12.3.2010 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT COURT IN W.P.(C).NO.11588/2009. EXT.P7: ORDER DTD. 9.4.2010 IN THE REVIEW PETITION NO.360/2010 IN W.P. (C).NO.11588/2009. EXT.P8: ORDER DTD. 19.5.2010 SIGNED BY R4 CO-SIGNED BY R3. EXT.P9: INFORMATION DTD. 15.6.2010 ISSUED BY THE INFORMATION OFFICER OF R2 CORPORATION. EXT.P10: INFORMATION FROM R2 CORPORATION DTD.2.8.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R6(a): ORDER IN R.P.NO.360/2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.11588/2009 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DTD. 9.4.2010. EXT.R6(b): NOC DTD. 7.8.2010 ISSUED BY THE HEALTH OFFICER, CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR. EXT.R6(c): RENEWAL APPLICATION DTD. 9.2.2011. EXT.R6(d): RENEWAL RECEIPT DTD. 9.2.2011 ...... // TRUE COPY // P. A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.573 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P8 order passed by the second respondent, Corporation of Thrissur. The 6th respondent is the owner of a godown doing the business in steel and cement. It is averred in the writ petition that the godown is used for storage of steel and cement. It is averred that the godown is situated 3 ft. away from the petitioner's house. The grievance of the petitioner is that storage of cement and steel in the godown is causing pollution in the surroundings and that the dust from the godown causes Bronchitis and breathing difficulties to the petitioner and his family members. In these circumstances, it is averred that the petitioner and his family members are not in a position to lead a normal life because of the air and noise pollution from the cement and steel godown. 2. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the Director of Urban Affiars. The Director, Urban Affairs passed Ext.P2 order on 29.1.2009 directing the 6th respondent to shift the godown to a non-residential area. Based on Ext.P2, the Corporation issued ::2:: W.P.(C).No.573 Of 2011 Ext.P3 order dated 26.2.2009 directing the 6th respondent to close down the godown or directing the Health Inspector to take measures to close down the godown. The petitioner also submitted complaint before the Lok Ayuktha. Lok Ayuktha, by Ext.P4 order dated 9.2.2009, directed the 6th respondent to shift the godown to a non-residential area. 3. In spite of the directions contained in Exts.P3 & P4, the 6th respondent continue to run the godown in the same premises. This Court, by Ext.P7 order, directed the Corporation to consider the appeal filed by the 6th respondent and to pass appropriate orders. The appeal was preferred against the order passed by the authorities vide Exts.P3 & P4. It is not disputed that Exts.P3 & P4 orders are passed based on the complaint lodged by the petitioner. The Corporation without issuing notice and without hearing the petitioner passed Ext.P8 order stating that the conduct of godown is not causing any pollution in the area and therefore the Corporation passed Ext.P8 order stating that the 6th respondent can continue to run the godown in the same premises. ::3:: W.P.(C).No.573 Of 2011 4. Since Ext.P8 order in appeal was passed without hearing the petitioner, who has raised serious objections against the running of the godown in the same place, the matter requires reconsideration. 5. Accordingly, Ext.P8 order is quashed. There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent Corporation to consider and dispose of the appeal preferred by the 6th respondent afresh after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, 6th respondent and other affected parties, if any. The order shall be passed within a period of three months from today. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-