IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9784 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DAMODARAN GOPALAN, KOTTOORKKUNNEL HOUSE, VADAVODU, VAZHAKKULAM PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES SOUTH CIRCLE, (P.E.S.O.) NO.140/RUKMINI-LAKSHMIPATHI ROAD, IGMORE-CHENNAI- 600 008. BY ADV. MR.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASST.S.G OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.9784 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the denial of an opportunity to forward his arguments to the respondent herein in regard to the issuance of licence for the granite quarry run by Sri.T.L.George. The matter was once considered by this Court by Exhibit P1 judgment. Therein a direction was issued to the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives to give notice to the petitioner also if there is any application under the Explosives Rules by the quarry owner Sri.T.L.George and hear the petitioner as well before a decision is taken on such application. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that even though he received notice dated 03.03.2010 directing him to appear before the respondent on 17.03.2010, he could not personally appear as he is medically unfit and is under treatment. Therefore, the petitioner has chosen to appear through a counsel who filed the vakkalath before the respondent along with an argument note. It W.P.(C) No.9784/2010 2 is submitted that the respondent even then insisted for personal presence of the petitioner. The petitioner only prays that the respondent may consider the objections raised by the petitioner in the argument note Exhibit P6. There will be a direction to the respondent to pass final orders in the matter after adverting to the contentions raised by the petitioner in Exhibit P6 also, as expeditiously as possible. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp