Disposed

Joseph.T.J., v. the Secretary

Kerala HC8 Jul 2019WP(C)/10810/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a writ to stop a respondent from operating a poultry and pig farm allegedly violating environmental and municipal laws. The Court noted the respondent claimed the pig farm was closed. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition recording that the farm was shut down without registration.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed in order, recording the fact that the pig farm was closed. Final orders pending future license applications.

Joseph.T.J., Vs the Secretary — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 JOSEPH.T.J., AGED 66 YEARS S/O.JOHN, THEKKEKKARA, VADAKKUMURI, THODUPUZHA EAST.P.O., THODUPUZHA, PIN-685585.

¶8

2 BABU JOHN CHERUPARAMBIL HOUSE, THAZHUVAMKUNNAM.P.O., KALLOORKKAD-686668, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶9

3 OUSEPH VARKEY 2/492, PARACKAL, THAZHUVAMKUNNAM.P.O., KALLOORKKAD686668, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.K.K.RAZIA

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 THE SECRETARY, KALLOORKAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE KALLOORKKAD, KERALA-686668.

¶13

2 KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,

¶14

PATTOM.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.

¶15

3 KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DISTRICT OFFICE (ERNAKULAM)-11, PERUMBAVOOR, MANNA RESIDENCY, M.G.ROAD-68.542, REPRESENTED BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER.

¶16

4 ALEX GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, NEDUNGATTU (CHUNDAMTHADATHIL), THAZHUVAMKUNNAM.P.O., KALLOORKKAD-686668, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶17

ADDL. R5 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KALLOORKKAD POLICE STATION, KALLOORKKAD P.O, PIN-686 668 ADDL.R5 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-06-2019

¶18

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶19

¶20

BY ADVS. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI. T.NAVEEN SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, SRI.JAYASANKAR.G SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH

¶21

SRI HARISH K.P.- SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶24

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

The petitioners and the 4^th respondent are neighbours. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to take effective steps to stop the functioning of poultry farm and pig farm in the property of the 4^th respondent, considering their representations, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶27

In the writ petition, it is alleged that the 4^th respondent is conducting a poultry farm and pig farm in his property, violating the statutory provisions and without obtaining necessary licence from the 1^st respondent, who is the Secretary of Kalloorkad Grama Panchayat, and consent from the 2^nd respondent Kerala State Pollution Control Board.

¶28

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶29

¶30

On 05.04.2019, when this writ petition came

¶31

up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for Pollution Control Board took notice on admission for respondents 2 and 3. This Court issued urgent notice on admission by speed post to respondents 1 and 4. This Court ordered that the Environmental Engineer or any competent officer of the Pollution Control Board shall conduct an inspection of the pig farm and poultry farm run by the 4^th respondent and submit a report before this Court within two weeks.

¶32

On 24.05.2019, when this writ petition came

¶33

up for consideration, this Court passed the following order;

¶34

“Despite service of notice, none appears for the 4^th respondent.

¶35

The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat seeks time to file counter affidavit.

¶36

Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 05.04.2019, the Environmental Engineer, Kerala State Pollution Control Board, District Office-II, Perumbavoor, Ernakulam has filed a report,

¶37

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶38

¶39

after conducting an inspection on 26.04.2019, producing therewith a copy of the letter dated 07.01.2019 issued to the 4^th respondent, whereby he has been directed to close down the pig farm in the absence of any consent to operate obtained from the Pollution Control Board.

¶40

In view of the aforesaid report of the Environmental Engineer, there will be an interim stay as prayed for, for a period of one month.”

¶41

Thereafter, on 24.06.2019, when this writ

¶42

petition came up for further consideration, the learned counsel for the 4^th respondent sought time to file counter affidavit. While granting two weeks' time, the interim order was extended by one month. The learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat submitted that, immediately after the order of this Court dated 24.05.2019, the 1^st respondent made a request before the Station House Officer, Kalloorkad Police Station for police assistance, invoking the provisions under clause (b) of subsection (1) of Section 252 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj

¶43

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶44

¶45

Act, 1994. The Station House Officer, Kalloorkad Police Station was suo motu impleaded as the additional 5^th respondent. The additional 5^th respondent was directed to render necessary police assistance to the 1^st respondent Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to ensure strict compliance of the interim order of this Court dated 24.05.2019.

¶46

A counter affidavit has been filed by the 4^th respondent, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition, producing therewith Ext.R4(e) consent to operate issued by the 3^rd respondent, which was valid up to 30.06.2012; Ext.R4(f) application dated 26.06.2019 for renewal of consent to operate, which is one submitted on 29.06.2019; Ext.R4(g) online industry registration receipt dated 26.06.2019; and other materials including Ext.R4(j) application dated 27.06.2019 for trade licence submitted before the 1^st respondent.

¶47

On 01.07.2019, when this writ petition was

¶48

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶49

¶50

taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat sought time to get instructions. While adjouring the matter to 08.07.2019, the interim order was permitted to be continued till then.

¶51

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat, the learned Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board, representing respondents 2 and 3, the learned counsel for the 4^th respondent and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the additional 5^th respondent.

¶52

During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the 4^th respondent would submit that the 4^th respondent had already closed down the pig farm and shifted the pigs to some other place. The learned counsel would also submit that the said respondent has no intention to conduct any pig farm or poultry farm in the property in question, without obtaining

¶53

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶54

¶55

necessary consent from the 2^nd respondent Pollution Control Board and licence from the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat.

¶56

The learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board would submit that the 4^th respondent has already closed down the pig farm.

¶57

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of recording the fact that the 4^th respondent has already closed down the pig farm and that he has no intention to conduct any pig farm or poultry farm in the property in question, without obtaining necessary consent from the 2^nd respondent Pollution Control Board and licence from the 1^st respondent Grama Panchayat.

¶58

It is made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the 4^th respondent pursuing the applications made before the 1^st respondent Grama

¶59

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶60

¶61

Panchayat for licence and that made before the 2^nd respondent Pollution Control Board for consent to operate. Consideration of any such application shall be made only with notice to the petitioners.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶64

AV/9/7

¶65

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶66

¶67

APPENDIX

¶68

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶69

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 20.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶70

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 3.11.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶71

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER AND MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 5.1.2019.

¶72

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.2.2019. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.2018.

¶73

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19.2.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶74

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶75

EXHIBIT R1(A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, KALLOORKKAD

¶76

EXHIBIT R1(B) THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 12.12.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER,PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, KALLOORKKAD

¶77

EXHIBIT R1(C) THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶78

EXHIBIT R1(D) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER

¶79

EXHIBIT R1(E) THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED

¶80

WP(C).No.10810 of 2019

¶81

¶82

14.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶83

EXHIBIT R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7-12019 ISSUED BY THE PCB TO THE PROPRIETOR EXHIBIT R3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 30-04-2019 ISSUED BY THE PCB EXHIBIT R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PIGGERY. EXHIBIT R4(B) TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE UNDERGROUND BIOGAS PLANT. EXHIBIT R4(C) TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE SEPTIC TANK. EXHIBIT-R4(D) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE SOAK PIT EXHIBIT-R4(E) TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-R4(F) TRUE COPY OF THE FRONT PAGE OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION EXHIBIT-R4(G) TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE PAYMENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD EXHIBIT-R4(H) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD EXHIBIT-R4(I) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 09/07/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-R4(J) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 27/06/2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-R4(K) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT ISSUED ON SENDING EXHIBIT-R4(J)

Joseph.T.J., v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph.T.J., v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Geetha K, Vs State of Kerala

M.K.Malik Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev.M.K. Vs the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Salim K.K., Vs State of Kerala

Shali P. Vs State of Kerala

Nagalassery Grama Panchayat Vs K.M.K. Granites