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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/15TH MAGHA, 1935
WP(C).No. 3491 of 2014 (J)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
ANTONY ANN KEVIN D'SILVA AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.JUSTIN D'SILVA, PROPRIETOR, ANN ENGINEERING WORKS
D.NO.44/1884(B), ASHOKA ROAD, KALOOR
KOCHI-682 017.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.A.SHAJI (SR.)
SRI.M.A.ASIF
SMT.NAMITHA JYOTHISH
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. SENIOR ENVIORNMENTAL ENGINEER
DISTRICT OFFICE-I, KERALA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
ERNAKULAM-682 020.
2. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN
ERNAKULAM-682 012, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3. JAWAHAR V.S.
CC 44/1564, ASHOKA ROAD, KALOOR
COCHIN-682 017.
4. THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
BY SRI. M.AJAY, SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
BY SRI.P.K.SOYUZ,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 3491 of 2014 (J)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 1/3/2013 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-2014.
EXHIBIT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 27/12/2013 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FACTORIES AND BOILERS FOR THE YEAR
2013-2014.
EXHIBIT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE E-CHALAN RECEIPT DATED 28/4/2013 FOR
REGISTRATION RENEWAL E-PAYMENT BY THE COMMERICAL TAXES
DEPARTMENT
EXHIBIT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 29/8/2013 OBTAINED BY THE
PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT FROM THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT.P5.TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE HEALTH
INSPECTOR BEFORE THE STANDING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, HEALTH
DEPARTMENT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT.P6.TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23/9/2013 IN WPC
NO.22979/2013 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT.P7.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 3/10/2013 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE HEALTH OFFICER UNDER THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT.P8.TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 10/10/2013 GIVEN BY THE
PETITIONER TO EXIHIBIT - P7 NOTICE.
EXHIBIT.P9.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15/1/2014 SENT BY THE 1ST
RESPONENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT.P10.TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 21/1/2014 GIVEN BY THE
PETITIONER TO EXHIBIT- P9 NOTICE.
EXHIBIT.P11.TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN DATED 24/1/2014 EVIDENCING THE
REMITTANCE OF THE REQUIRED FEE FOR OBTAINING CONSENT FROM THE 1ST
RESPONDENT PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
R.AV //TRUE COPY//
PATO JUDGE
C.T.RAVIKUMAR.J.
=================
W.P.C.NO.3491 OF 2014
=====================
Dated this the 5th day of February 2014
JUDGMENT
-----------------
The petitioner who is conducting an engineering workshop filed this writ petition on being aggrieved by Ext.P9 notice dated 15.01.2014. As per Ext.P1 the petitioner was informed that pursuant to an enquiry conducted by the Senior Environmental Engineer attached to the Kerala Pollution Control Board it was found that the engineering workshop is being conducted without obtaining the consent to operate and also without setting up the necessary machineries for controlling pollution. In the said circumstances, the petitioner was asked to suspend the functioning of the workshop till he obtains the requisite consent to operate from the Pollution Control Board. The petitioner was also cautioned with coercive steps in case of his failure to comply with the said direction in tune with the provisions under the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Water (Prevention of Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
I have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st W.P.C.NO.3491 OF 2014 2 respondent and also the learned Government Pleader. The petitioner did not have a case that he is in possession of a valid consent to operate obtained from the Pollution Control Board. The position that no workshop could function without obtaining such a valid consent to operate cannot be disputed. In the said circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with Ext.P9 notice as it was issued in tune with the statutory requirements. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already approached the 1st respondent with an application for grant of consent to operate and it is yet to be considered. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the application, if any, submitted by the petitioner for getting consent to operate the engineering workshop which is referred to Ext.P9 notice and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously and in accordance with law after conducting a proper inspection regarding the remedial steps taken by the petitioner to rectify the defects. Needless to say that on such inspection if any further defect is noted or rectification is found inadequate the petitioner shall be given communication in that regard. Such inspection for the aforesaid purposes shall be done expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. After conducting such an W.P.C.NO.3491 OF 2014 3 inspection order on the application submitted by the petitioner for grant of consent to operate shall be taken up for consideration and orders shall be passed thereon within a further period of ten days.
This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE R.AV