Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 2 docs
Shri Gopal Kumar, Se, ... vs Maj Gen Gautam Dutt, Dgw, E-In-Cs ... on 13 July, 2006
THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981

User Queries

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Kerala High Court
Vasudevan Nair vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3010 of 2008(G)


1. VASUDEVAN NAIR,THAYYIL VEEDU
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER

3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

4. GEOLOGIST,MINING AND GEOLOGY

5. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

6. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER

                For Petitioner  :SMT.SADHANA KUMARI ESWARI

                For Respondent  :SMT.K.K.THULASY BHAI,SC,POLLUTION C.BOA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :26/03/2009

 O R D E R
                       V.GIRI, J.
       -------------------------
             W.P.(C).No.3010 of 2008
       -------------------------
         Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009.

                     JUDGMENT

The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order passed by the Geologist and Ext.P6 communication by the Pollution Control Board.

2. Insofar as Ext.P5 is concerned, I note that the same is appealable under Rule 49 of the Kerala Miner Mineral Concession Rules. It is open to the petitioner to file an appeal. If such appeal is filed within one month from today, the competent authority shall consider the same as having been filed within time and take an expeditious decision.

3. Insofar as the challenge against Ext.P6 is concerned, the same is only a proposal on the part of the Pollution Control Board to refuse to give consent to operate. The said order is independently appealable under the authorities under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. W.P.(C).No.3010 of 2008 :: 2 ::

The writ petition is closed, reserving the liberty of the petitioner to challenge Ext.P5 and take other appropriate steps against the final order, that would be passed on Ext.P6. The appellate authority shall dispose of the appeal, if any, presented by the petitioner against Ext.P5, within a period of three months from the date of its filing. The other contentions of the petitioner are left open.

Sd/-

(V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//