Disposed

Sulaiman Kunju v. the District Collector

Kerala HC1 Feb 2017WP(C)/840/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to consider a pending complaint regarding unauthorized use of sound boxes by respondents under Noise Pollution Rules, ensuring a hearing and finality within a month.

What did the court decide?

The respondent was directed to consider the petition dated 30.11.2016 after providing an opportunity of hearing and attain finality within one month.

Sulaiman Kunju Vs the District Collector — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/12TH MAGHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 840 of 2017 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SULAIMAN KUNJU, AGED 76 YEARS, S/O.MYTHEEN KUNJU SULAIMAN, RESIDING AT PUNJAVELUMBEL PADEETTATHIL, KRISHNAPURAM P.O, OCHIRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.V.S.AFSAL KHAN SRI.SADER E.REAZ

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA - 688 001.

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM -690 502.

¶12

3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM -690 502.

¶13

4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM - 690 502.

¶14

5. HASSAN KUNJU, S/O.ABDUL REHMAN, PUNCHAVILEMBEL HOUSE, KRISHNAPURAM P.O, (SECRETARY OCHIRA PUNCHAVILAMBU MASJID, KRISHNAPURAM P.O, OCHIRA) - 690 533.

¶15

6. NIZAMUDDIN, ASSISTANT (MUKRI) OCHIRA PUNCHAVILAMBU MASJID, KRISHNAPURAM P.O, OCHIRA-690 533.

¶16

7. MUHAMMED, S/O.ABDUL REHMAN, PUNCHAVILEMBEL HOUSE, KRISHNAPURAM P.O, OCHIRA PUNCHAVILAMBU MASJID, KRISHNAPURAM P.O, OCHIRA-690 533.

¶17

R1 TO R4 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT K.R.DEEPA

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

K.V.

¶20

WP(C).No. 840 of 2017 (D)

¶21

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 1.12.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶24

P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 24.1.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶25

P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 30.11.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

K.V.

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 840 of 2017

¶32

Dated this the 1^st day of February, 2017

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

Petitioner is a senior citizen aged about 76 years old. A Masjid was established very close to the house of the petitioner. After a few months, according to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7 have started using sound boxes without securing necessary permission from the statutory authority under the Noise Pollution Rules constituted under the Environmental Protection Act. In that view of the matter, petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 before the 1^st respondent, which was forwarded by the 1^st respondent to the 2^nd respondent, who is the statutory authority under the Rules and the same is pending consideration. Nondisposal of Ext.P3 on an early basis is the grievance highlighted by the petitioner in this writ petition.

¶35

Having heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Senior Government Pleader, there will be direction to the 2^nd respondent to take on board Ext.P3 and consider the same in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as any other interested or

¶36

W.P.(C). No.840 of 2017

¶37

¶38

affected persons and attain finality to the same within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶39

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶40

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶41

smv 01.02.2017

Sulaiman Kunju v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sulaiman Kunju v. the District Collector

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

St.Mary'S Jacobite Syrian Church Vs Mohammed Y. Safirulla

Jiju Thomas Vs Salim

Sreekumar M Vs Sri. B.Srinivas IAS

Joseph John Vs the Managing Director

Joseph Velupuzhakkal Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Mathew Vs State of Kerala