Disposed

Sreekrishnan O v. the District Collector

Kerala HC13 Feb 2020WP(C)/3372/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner Secretary of Velagosha Committee sought permission for fireworks display for Machad Mamangam festival. Original application rejected due to missing licences. Subsequent application submitted. Court directed 2nd respondent to consider new application for other items excluding prohibited substances and pass order by 15.02.2020.

What did the court decide?

Directed 2nd respondent to consider application dated 11.02.2020 regarding other fireworks items and pass order on or before 15.02.2020. Clarified no reconsideration on Amittu, Gundu, and Kuzhiminnal.

Sreekrishnan O Vs the District Collector — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 24TH MAGHA, 1941

¶7

WP(C).No.3372 OF 2020(V)

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

SREEKRISHNAN O AGED 33 YEARS

¶10

S/O. NARAYANAN, OTTAYIL HOUSE, MANALITHARA P.O., KURUMATHARA, THRISSUR DIST-680 589

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR SMT.M.BUSHRA HARIS

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003

¶14

2 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,

¶15

CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003

¶16

3 THE TAHSILDAR, THALAPPILLY TALUK, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR-680 582

¶17

4 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,

¶18

THRISSUR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 003

¶19

5 DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES C2-IIIRD FLOOR, CGO COMPLEX, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682 030

¶20

R1 TO 4 BY SRI.RENIL ANTO KANDAMKULATHI,GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR,ASGI

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

WP(C) No.3372 OF 2020(V)

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dated this the 13^th day of February, 2020

¶27

Ravikumar, J.

¶28

Denial of the request for fireworks display in Machad Mamangam Manalithara temple constrained the petitioner, who is the Secretary of the Velagosha Committee of the said temple, to file this writ petition. Ext.P1 is the application submitted therefor. It is dated 09.12.2019. The same was rejected as per Ext.P2 order dated 22.01.2020. It is being aggrieved by the rejection of Ext.P1 application as per Ext.P2, this writ petition has been filed seeking quashment of Ext.P2 and issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner for exhibiting fireworks in connection with the Velaghosham of the temple at least for the limited extent.

¶29

WP(C) No.3372 OF 2020(V)

¶30

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶32

learned Government Pleader and also the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India.

¶33

A perusal of Ext.P2 would reveal that Ext.P1 application was rejected mainly on two reasons. The first ground of rejection is absence of magazine and the second one is that LE-3 licence was not produced along with the application. It is also stated in Ext.P2 that the 1^st respondent cannot grant permission to conduct fireworks with Amittu, Gundu and Kuzhiminnal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that subsequently, another application was submitted on 11.02.2020 and along with the same, LE-3 licence was produced. It is further stated that portable magazine would be arranged.

¶34

Learned ASGI submitted that the question of grant of permission for conducting fireworks using Gundu and Amittu is a matter which could be considered only by the Chief Controller of Explosives. In the light of the said

¶35

WP(C) No.3372 OF 2020(V)

¶36

¶37

submission, we do not think that the 2^nd respondent-ADM can be directed to consider the question of grant of licence for conducting fireworks display using Gundu, Amittu and Kuzhiminnal. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the subsequent application submitted on 11.02.2020, permission was also sought for licence to conduct fireworks display using Olapadakkam (5000 in numbers) and Poothiri (25 in numbers). The precise case of the petitioner is that from time immemorial, fireworks display had been conducted in the temple as ritual, in connection with the temple festival. That apart, it is stated that the area in question where it is proposed to be conducted is having an extent of 25.58 Acres. Obviously, permission sought for is to conduct the fireworks display on 16.02.2020. Taking into account all such aspects, we are of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with the following directions:-

¶38

In case the application dated 11.02.2020, allegedly submitted by the petitioner on that day is received by the 2^nd respondent-ADM, Thrissur along with the requisite materials

¶39

WP(C) No.3372 OF 2020(V)

¶40

¶41

in the sense the required licences and the other documents, he shall consider the application and pass appropriate orders thereon. Taking into account the fact that the permission sought for is to conduct fireworks display on 16.02.2020, an order shall be passed on or before 15.02.2020. We make it clear that the above direction shall not be taken as one to reconsider the question of grant of permission to conduct fireworks display with Amittu, Gundu and Kuzhiminnal. In other words, what is to be considered is whether the display of fireworks can be permitted to the limited extent by using the other items of fireworks mentioned in the application dated 11.02.2020.

¶42

Ordered accordingly.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE

¶45

Sd/- N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

¶46

aks/13.02.2020

¶47

WP(C) No.3372 OF 2020(V)

¶48

¶49

APPENDIX

¶50

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE	COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
	NIL BEFOR	SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER E THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE 13919 THE 2	COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C6- /2019 DATED 22.01.2020 ISSUED BY ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE DATED ORIEN	COPY OF THE INSURANCE POLICY 30.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE TAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE PLAN DATED	COPY OF THE ONSITE EMERGENCY OF THE FIRE WORKS DISPLAY PLOT NIL
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE IN W COURT	COPY OF THE ORDER DARED 22.2.19 PC NO.5034/19 OF THIS HON'BLE
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE DATED RESPO	COPY OF THE LICENSE FORM LE-1 30.10.2003 ISSUED BY THE 2ND NDENT
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE TRANS	COPY OF THE LE 7 LICENSE TO PORT EXPLOSIVES IN ROAD VAN
	DATED RESPO	11.8.15 ISSUED BY THE 5TH NDENT

¶52

WP(C) No.3372 OF 2020(V)

¶53

Sreekrishnan O v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekrishnan O 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

Suo Motu Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Anil Kumar, Vs State of Kerala

The Managing Committee, Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

Reghu P.K Vs the District Collector

L.Parameswaran Vs the District Collector

V.Girijan, Vs State of Kerala