IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 34073 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUJA UTHAMAN, ILLICHUVATTIL HOUSE, ARIKKUZHA P.O., MANAKKADU VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. SMT.P.B.WAHIDA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. MANAKKADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, ARIKKUZHA P.O., MANAKKAD, IDUKKI. 2. HEALTH INSPECTOR, PUBLIC HEALTH CENTRE, MANAKKADU, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. SRI. E.N.SASI, S/O. NARAYANAN, ELAMPASSERIYIL HOUSE, MANAKKADU VILLAGE. ( ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO.252/2008 DATED 9.1.2008) BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM BY G.P. SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 34073 of 2007 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January , 2008 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.B.H.Mansoor, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.T.I.Abdul salam, the learned counsel for the party respondent and Sri.K.J.Muhammed Anzar, the learned Government Pleader for the 2nd respondent. 2. Sri.Mansoor submitted that the Panchayat has issued Ext.P5 stop memo even as Ext.P4 application for licence filed by the petitioner is pending. Sri.Abdul Salam submitted that the petitioner relies on Ext.P1 consent letter issued by the neighbours. The additional 3rd respondent who is closest neighbour of the petitioner and he, at any rate, has not issued any consent and other nearby neighbours also have not issued consent. Since the Panchayat has already issued Ext.P5 and since Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner is already pending before the Panchayat, I am not inclined to decide the issue on merits. 3. I dispose of this writ petition directing the Panchayat to consider finalisation of Ext.P5 stop memo along with Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner with notice to the 3rd respondent and WPC No.34073/2007 2 anybody else, who has filed complaint before the Panchayat against the conduct of poultry farm by the petitioner. Hence the following directions: The first respondent is directed to take up Ext.P4 application and files relating to Ext.P5 together with objection, if any, filed by the petitioner to Ext.P5 stop memo. The Panchayat will hear the petitioner, additional 3rd respondent and also anybody else who has filed objection to the petitioner's poultry farm. Hearing will be conducted, as directed above, and final orders will be passed by the Panchayat on both the issues at the earliest at any rate within one month of receiving a copy of this judgment. The Panchayat will consider the suitability of the site where on the petitioner proposes to conduct the poultry farm. Since Ext.P2 NOC appears to be in currency, the petitioner is permitted to conduct the poultry farm, but only subject to the final decision to be taken as directed in this writ petition. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. dpk