Disposed

V.Thankappan Vaidyar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2007WP(C)/1073/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning solid waste dumping in Punalur Municipality without examining merits. It directed the petitioner to submit a representation to the Municipality, which must consider it within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to submit representation to the 3rd respondent; directed 3rd respondent to consider, inspect, and make a decision within two weeks.

V.Thankappan Vaidyar Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2007 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1928

¶4

WP(C).No. 1073 of 2007(C)

PETITIONER:

V.THANKAPPAN VAIDYAR, KALLUVILA VEEDU, PLACHERY P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM (DIST).

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SMT.JANCY MATHEW

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶13

KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

¶14

THE SECRETARY, PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR, GOVT. PLEADER. R2 BY ADV. M.K. CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, PCB. R3 BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI,SC.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

¶18

W.P.(C) No. 1073 OF 2007

¶19

Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2007

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

It is seen that the petitioner is having serious grievances regarding the dumping of solid waste within the area of Punalur Municipality. But Ext.P2 representation is submitted by the petitioner not before the Municipality but before the Government arraying the Municipality as a respondent. Mr.Krishnamoni, Standing Counsel for the Municipality assures me that if the Municipality receives a representation from the petitioner, the needful shall be done after conducting necessary inspections.

¶22

Under these circumstances without going into the merits of the grounds raised, I dispose of the Writ Petition directing the petitioner to submit a representation voicing all his grievances before the 3^rd respondent-Municipality. If the 3^rd respondent receives such a representation within two weeks from today the Municipality will consider the same, conduct necessary inspections, hear the petitioner and take a correct decision under intimation to the petitioner. Petitioner is given liberty to approach this Court again if he is aggrieved by the decision taken by the 3^rd respondent.

¶23

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶24

btt

¶25

WPC 2

V.Thankappan Vaidyar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Thankappan Vaidyar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

District Panchayat Thrissur Vs K.Gopinathan

Vijayakumar K.G. Vs Corporation of Kochi

Salil Gupta Vs the State of Kerala

Ambedkar Nagar Residents Association Vs State of Kerala

T.K.Skariah Vs the K.S.R.T.C

O.P.Muhammed Abdul Kareem Vs Dist.Collector.