IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1233 of 2007(V) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.K.MOIDU, S/O. SOOPY, PEEDIKA KANDY HOUSE, P.O.PELERI, KADIYANGAD, PERAMBRA, CALICUT DIST., REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI. T.GANGADHARAN NAIR, S/O. GOVINDA KURUP, AMBADY HOUSE, KODAKAL P.O., ATHOLI, KOZHIKODE DIST. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAGARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAGARA. *3. M/S. VIMAL CHAND JAIN 46, ERULLAPPAN STREET, SOW CARPET, CHENNAI-600 079. *(DELETED) *R3. DELETED AS PER ORDER DTD. 06/03/07 ON I.A. NO. 3201/2007. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.R. SABU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1233/2007-V: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 15/07/2006. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DTD. 26/09/2006 IN M.V.A.A. NO. 533/06. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 16/12/2006 IN M.V.A.A. NO. 533/06. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD. 06/01/2006. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD. 28/01/2006. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DTD. 06/01/2006. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DTD. 30/01/2006. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD. 06/12/2006. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE INTIMATION DTD. 06/12/2006 BY THE TAHSILDAR TO THE SUB- INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ATHOLI. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 29/06/2005 IN W.P.(C). NO. 11503/2005. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DTD. 31/01/2007. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 13/02/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.37955/2007 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Ext.P2 is a permit that has been issued to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. The petitioner submits that when conducting blasting operations on the strength of Ext.P2, by issuing Ext.P4 he was ordered to stop further blasting. He had challenged Ext.P4 in a writ petition before this court in which Ext.P5 interim order was passed and the same was modified by Ext.R2(a). It is complained by the petitioner that again a stop memo has been issued by Ext.P6 and that is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. It would appear from the pleadings of the second respondent as also the instruction of the Government Pleader that, the main cause for issuing stop memo was the alleged violation of the conditions of Ext.P2 and in 2 particular condition No.4 there of. Needless to say that, since conditions are imposed in Ext.P2 these conditions shall be followed by the petitioner. Therefore, the respondents need permit the petitioner to continue the blasting only subject to compliance with the conditions in Ext.P2. Subject to compliance as above, I direct that the petitioner will be permitted to continue blasting. I make it clear that in case the petitioner has any difficulty to comply with any of the condition imposed, it is for him to move the appropriate authority and that authority shall consider the matter and take appropriate decision. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 3