Disposed

K.a.Rahim v. Muttil Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC8 Apr 2024WP(C)/451/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A 2017 writ petition seeking Panchayat action against illegal construction and enforcement of a Pollution Control Board order was treated as infructuous; the petitioner was permitted to approach the Panchayat with any surviving grievance, and the petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner free to submit fresh representation to Muttil Grama Panchayat regarding any surviving grievance; petition disposed of.

K.a.Rahim Vs Muttil Grama Panchayat — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 451 OF 2017

PETITIONER:

K.A.RAHIM

AGED 54 YEARS

S/O. AHAMMED KUTTY, KALADAN HOUSE, MUTTIL P.O, CHERUMOOLAVAYAL, WYNAD DISTRICT – 673 122.

¶10

BY ADVS.

¶11

DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM SRI.DOMINIC JOSE

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 MUTTIL GRAMA PANCHAYAT

¶14

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUTTIL P.O, KALPETTA, WYNAD – 673 122

¶15

2 THE SECRETARY MUTTIL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUTTIL P.O, KALPETTA, WYNAD -673 122

¶16

3 SALEEM

¶17

AGED 35 YEARS PAZHITHODI HOUSE, CHERUMOOLAVAYAL, MUTTIL P.O, KALPETTA, WYNAD -673122

¶18

4 SITHARA W/O. SALEEM, PAZHITHODI HOUSE, CHERUMOOLAVAYAL, MUTTIL P.O, KALPETTA, WYNAD -673 122

¶19

5 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER

¶20

KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, WAYANAD, JASAM COMPLEX, PINANGODE ROAD, KALPETTA - 673 121

¶21

BY ADVS. SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY SMT. JAYASREE K.P., SC, MUTTIL GRAMA PANCHAYAT SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE - R1 SRI. T.NAVEEN SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C) NO. 451 OF 2017

¶24

¶25

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶26

W.P.(C) No.451 of 2017

¶27

Dated this the 08^th day of April, 2024

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The above writ petition is filed with the following

¶30

prayers:

¶31

“i) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take follow up action pursuant to Exhibits P-2 and P-3 and demolish the illegal construction work done by the respondents 3 and 4, deviating from the approved plan.

¶32

ii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus; or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 5th respondent to implement Exhibit P-7 order issued by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board.

¶33

iii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus; or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the

¶34

¶35

WP(C) NO. 451 OF 2017

¶36

respondents 1 and 2 to take effective action against the respondents 3 and 4 for pouring waste water and other solid waste to the public drainage system.

¶37

iv) to grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may consider just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” SIC

¶38

When this writ petition came up for

¶39

consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent Panchayath, submitted that the prayers

¶40

in this writ petition are infructuous. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner want to get

¶41

instruction from his client.

¶42

I think, this writ petition need not be

¶43

retained here because it is pending before this Court

¶44

from 2017 onwards. If there is any surviving grievance to the petitioner, the petitioner is free to

¶45

WP(C) NO. 451 OF 2017

¶46

¶47

approach the 1^st respondent with appropriate

¶48

representation.

¶49

With the above observation, this writ petition is

disposed of.

Sd/-

nvj

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶54

¶55

WP(C) NO. 451 OF 2017

¶56

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 451/2017

¶57

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶58

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY THE OVERSEER, LSGD SECTION

¶59

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 12/3/2015

¶60

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION MADE BY THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶61

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/3/2016, ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 4/5/2016 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.

¶62

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

¶63

//TRUE COPY//

¶64

PA TO JUDGE

K.a.Rahim v. Muttil Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.a.Rahim v. Muttil Grama Panchayat

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

Ammu Anil Vs State of Kerala

Annamkutty Vs Kalady Grama Panchayat

M.P.Cheriyakoya Vs Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Mary Kuriakose Vs Village Officer

Sathyan K.A Vs Njarakkal Grama Panchayat

K.Vasudevan Namboodiripad Vs Village Officer