IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 26842 of 2011(E) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ RASHEED,AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.PAREETHKHAN, KAYYA MANZIL HOUSE,EDAPPALLY BYE PASS, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE, SRI.JOHN VIPIN, SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI, SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MALAYATTOOR,KODANADU P.O.,PIN 683 544. 2. ADDITIONAL INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL INSPECTOR OF FACTORIES, ERNAKULAM,COCHIN 682 030. R1 & R2 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. JAMES KURIAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.26842/2011 E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF FACTORY LICENCE WITH REGISTER NO./EKM/03/22/88 DATED 11-11-88. EXT.P2 COPY OF NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED 22-08-2003. EXT.P3 COPY OF NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED 25-11-2006. EXT.P4 COPY OF FACTORY LICENCE NO.N/EKM/03/22/88 UP TO 2008. EXT.P65 COPY OF FACTORY LICENCE NO.N/EKM/03/22/88 UP TO 2011. EXT.P6 REQUEST LETTER DATED 24-06-2011. EXT.P7 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 1-8-2011. EXT.P8 COPY OF ORDER OF REJECTION BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 6-9-2011. EXT.P9 COPY OF PRESS NOTE DATED NIL. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.93/99 DTD. 15/11/99. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).26842/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner seeks issuance of an NOC in respect of his wood based industry which, according to the petitioner, is necessary for obtaining licence under the Factories and Boilers Act. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the first respondent is the competent authority to issue such a certificate and to substantiate the said contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Ext.P10, the Government Order dated 15.11.1999. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, the NOC as sought for by the petitioner, can be issued only by the State Level Empowered Committee, the convener of which is the Chief Conservator of Forests and the Nodal Officer. Therefore, the petitioner has to move the said authority. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Ext.P9, a note issued by the Chief Conservator of Forests. On perusal of the said note, it can be seen that DFO has been given the authority to issue NOC only in respect of units which were issued NOC prior to W.P.(C).26842/11 2 30.10.2002. Ext.P2 is the NOC available on record and this was issued on 22.8.2003. This means that the petitioner has not produced any material to show that any NOC was issued to his unit prior to 30.10.2002 to claim the benefit of Ext.P9 note. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to apply for NOC, as advised in Ext.P8. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs