Kerala High Court
Sudheer.S vs Nellanad Gramapanchayath on 10 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:50935
WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 SUDHEER.S
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O SAIFUDHEEN, SASIMANDIRAM, CHARUMKUZHI,
ADDAYAMON.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -
695614
2 THAJUDHEEN.A
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O ALIKANNU, THOPPIL HOUSE, ADAYAMON.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695614
BY ADVS.
SHRI.AJITH KRISHNAN
SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.)
RESPONDENTS:
1 NELLANAD GRAMAPANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYATHOFFICE,
VENJARAMOOD.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695607
2 SECRETARY
NELLANAD GRAMAPANCHAYATH PANCHAYATHOFFICE,
VENJARAMOOD.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695607
3 ADDL.R3: RAHUL B.RAJ,
S/O.DHARMARAJAN,GREESHMA BHAVAN, CHERUKOTTUKONAM,
VINJARMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
2025:KER:50935
WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025
2
4 ADDL.R4: BIJU T.S.,
S/O.THANKAPPAN,PANDIYANCHIRA, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
5 ADDL.R5: VAISHAK S.,
S/O.SATHEESHAN,S.S.BHAVAN, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
6 ADDL.R6: DEEPAK,
S/O.BHUVENDRAN, DEEPAK BHAVAN, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
7 ADDL.R7: SAINU CHANDIR,
S/O.RAJAN,GEETHALAYAM, MAILAKUZHI, VINJARAMOODU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
8 ADDL.R8 :SHIBIN U.S.,
S/O.SHIVANNANDAN, MATHRUSMARANA, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
9 ADDL.R9: AJAYAKUMAR,
S/O.RAGHUMATHAN,KUMAR VILASAM, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607
0 ADDL.R10: SATHEESHAN
S/O.KRISHNAN, S.S.BHAVAN, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
11 ADDL.R11: ARJUNAN,
S/O.CHELLAPPAN, NELLIPALLY VEEDU, VINJARAMOODU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
12 ADDL.R12: SUDARRSHAN,
S/O.KESHAVAN,S.S.BHAVAN, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607.
13 ADDL.R13: LIJU. S.,
S/O.SATHEENA,UTHRADAM, VALIYAKATTAKKAL,
VINJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695607 *ADDL.R3
TO R13 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 20.06.2025
IN I.A.1/2025 IN WP(C)21247/2025.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR
2025:KER:50935
WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025
3
SHRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 10.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:50935
WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025
4
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 10th day of July, 2025 The petitioners are the partners of a hot tar mix plant ('Plant', in short) situated in a property within the territorial limits of the 1 respondent Panchayat. The st petitioners have purchased the machinery costing more than Rs. 5/- Crore to start the Plant. The petitioners have obtained Ext.P6 consent to operate from the Kerala State Pollution Control Board, Ext.P7 No-Objection Certificate from the Fire and Rescue Station, and Ext.P8 license from the Factories and Boilers Department. After the earlier rounds of litigation, the petitioners submitted an application before the 1st respondent on 21.06.2024 under Section 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act,1994 ('Act', in short) for permission to install machinery to produce bitumen macadam. But, by the impugned Ext.P11 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 5 letter the Village Panchayat of the 1st respondent rejected the application on the finding that the functioning of the Plant may cause cancer and other serious ailments to the people of the locality. Ext.P11 letter is unjustifiable and arbitrary.
2. The 1st respondent in their counter affidavit has contended that the petitioners have an alternative statutory remedy under the Act to challenge Ext. P11 letter. The petitioners have erected and are operating the Plant since 2017, without obtaining any prior permission from the 1 respondent. Even though the 1st st respondent had issued a stop memo on 3.4.2017 to stop the Plant and Village Panchayat dismissing the appeal filed against the stop memo, the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions ('Tribunal' for brevity) has stayed the proposed action against the Plant. Even after the passing of the stay order, the 1st respondent has received numerous complaints from the people of the 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 6 locality against the illegal operation of the Plant. Accordingly, the 1st respondent again issued stop memos to the petitioners. However, the said stop memos were also stayed by the Tribunal in an appeal filed by the petitioners. The petitioners have constructed several buildings without obtaining a building permit. On 22.06.2024, the petitioners submitted Ext.R1(d) application for the installation permit. As the application was defective, the same was not considered by the Panchayat. After that, the petitioners submitted an application for a permit for a commercial building. On finding that the petitioners have established the Plant without any prior permission and that the Plant is causing severe pollution in the locality, the Village Panchayat, by Ext.R1(e) decision, rejected the application. There is no illegality in the decision.
3. The respondents 3 to 13 in their counter affidavit have stated that the plant is discharging 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 7 contaminated water and causing excessive pollution in the locality. The heavy vehicles plying to and from the Plant are adversely affecting the respondents. The findings of this Court in the inter-party judgments justify Ext.R1(e) decision. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed.
4. Heard, Sri. Ranjith Thampan, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, assisted by Sri.Ajith Krishnan, Sri. M.H. Hanil Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. S. Kaleeswaram Raj, the learned counsel appearing for the party respondents.
5. Sri. Ranjith Thampan drew the attention of this Court to sub-section (4) of Section 233 of the Act and argued that, after the Act 14 of 2018 was incorporated in the Act w.e.f., 20.10.2017, a Panchayat does not have the power to refuse/reject an application for permission to construct a factory and/or install machinery. As the 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 8 petitioners have obtained the licenses and permissions from the competent statutory authorities, the 1st respondent ought to have allowed Ext.R1(d) application with safeguards and conditions, if they felt it was necessary. Instead, without any cogent material, the 2nd respondent has issued Ext.P11 letter, by relying on Ext.R1(e) decision of the Village Panchayat, on a hypothetical assumption that the running of the factory may cause cancer and other health problems to the people of the locality. The 1st respondent has not conducted any scientific study or considered the licenses and permissions granted to the petitioners by the competent statutory authorities to establish the Plant and to install the machinery. Ext.P11 letter and Ext.R1 (e) decision are liable to be set aside on the above grounds. The scope and ambit of Act 14 of 2018 has to be interpreted by this Court. The Plant has been functioning since 2017, which is evidenced by the materials on 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 9 record. The contentions now raised by the respondents in their counter affidavits were not considered by the Village Panchayat or the 2nd respondent in Exts.P11 and R1(e) decisions. Therefore, the decisions are liable to be quashed and the 2nd respondent may be directed to reconsider the matter afresh, after adverting to the contentions raised by the parties, especially the implication of Act 14 of 2018.
6. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 argued that, the writ petition has to fail for the reason that there is no challenge against Ext.R1(e) decision passed by the Village Panchayat and Ext.P11 letter is only a covering letter issued by the 2 nd respondent enclosing Ext.R1 (e) decision. The petitioners have consciously not produced Ext.R1(e) decision, assuming that this Court may comprehend the gravity of the problem in the functioning of the Plant. Likewise, since the buildings in the Plant were unauthorisedly 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 10 constructed and were illegally functioning before the incorporation of the Act 14 of 2018 in the Statute, Section 233 (4) has no application in the case at hand. Moreover, as the Plant is functioning in unauthorisedly constructed buildings, the petitioners are not entitled to an installation permit. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed.
7. Sri. Kaleeswaram Raj placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Pavithran V.K.M and another v. State of Kerala and others ((2009) 4 KLT 20 (FB) and argued that, since Ext.R1(e) decision is referred to in Ext.P11 letter, the petitioners ought to have challenged Ext.R1(e). Therefore, it is only to be assumed that there is no challenge against the said decision. Similarly, the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy available under Article 276 of the Act to challenge the impugned orders. In light of the law laid down by this Court in R.Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala and others 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 11 (2024 SCC Online KER 5804), this Court may not entertain this writ petition. He also contended that as the Plant had started functioning before Act 14 of 2018, the petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of the amendment.
8. The 1st petitioner had started the Plant in 2017, after getting Exts.P15 and P14 consent and permission from the Kerala State Pollution Control Board and the District Medical Officer, respectively. It is after the commencement of the Plant, that the 2nd respondent had issued Ext.P16 stop memo to the 1st petitioner. By Ext.P18 order, the stop memo was stayed by the Tribunal. Subsequently, another stop memo was issued by the 2 nd respondent, which was also stayed by the Tribunal by Ext.P29 order. It is during the pendency of the above proceedings and other litigations that the petitioners filed Ext.R1(d) application for installation permission under Section 233 of the Act. But, by Ext.R1(e) decision, 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 12 the Village Panchayat has rejected the application on the ground that the Plant has been illegally functioning and has caused health problems to the people of the locality. Furthermore, the petitioners' application for a building permit was also declined because the petitioners had obtained a possession certificate for the property by a court order, and the case was still pending, and also, numerous people in the locality have contracted various diseases. By Ext.P11 order, the 2nd respondent communicated Ext.R1 (e) decision to the petitioners
9. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners contends that, in light of sub-section (4) of Section 233 of the Act, which came into effect from 20.10.2017, as per Act 14 of 2018, the 1 st respondent is not empowered to reject an application submitted under Section 233.
10. It is apposite to refer to Section 233 of the Act, which reads as follows:-
67[(1)] No person shall, without the permission of the Village Panchayat and except in accordance with the conditions specified in such permission, -
2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 13
(a) construct or establish any factory, workshop or workplace in which it is proposed to employ steam power, water power or other mechanical power or electrical power; or
(b) install in any premises any machinery or manufacturing plant driven by any power as aforesaid, not being machinery or manufacturing plant exempted by the 68[provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder].
69[(2) An application for permission under sub-section (1) shall be submitted to the Village Panchayat addressed to the Secretary 69A[or officer authorized by the Secretary] in such form and with such details as prescribed.
69A[(2A) The Secretary or officer authorized by him shall, issue an acknowledgement to the applicant, on receipt of application along with the supporting documents in the form, as may be prescribed, and shall verify the application and all supporting documents on the spot itself, and if any supporting document is not found attached along with the application, the Secretary or officer authorized by him shall, immediately inform the applicant in writing the list of missing documents and allow the applicant to submit the missing documents as early as possible, but not later than five days from the date of receipt of application.] 69B[(3) the Secretary or the officer authorised by him shall, as soon as may be, after the receipt of the application enquire and report to the Village Panchayat as to whether the establishment of the factory, workshop or workplace or other installation of machinery or manufacturing plant for which permission is applied for is objectionable by reason of density of population in the neighbourhood and possibility to cause nuisance or pollution and the Village Panchayat, after having considered the application and the reports of the Secretary and of such other authorities as specified in sub-section (4) may, as expeditiously as possible, within thirty days, grant the permission either absolutely or subject to such conditions as it thinks fit to impose.] (4) Before granting 69C[x x x x] permission under sub- section (3), the 69D[Secretary], shall obtain and consider.
(a) a report of the Inspector of Factories appointed under the Factories Act, 1948 (Central Act 63 of 1948) or of an officer of the Industries Department not below the rank of an Industries Extension Officer having jurisdiction over the area regarding the adequacy of ventilation, light etc. and sufficiency of the height and size of the rooms and doors and the suitability of exists to be used in case of fire in the plan of factories, workshop, workplace 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 14 or premises if they came within the purview of the Factories Act, 1948 (Central Act 63 of 1948) and such other matters as may be prescribed :
(b) a report of the District Medical Officer 69A [in case the applicant is a hospital, clinic, para-medical institution, clinical laboratories or other healthcare institution,] regarding the possibility of nuisance or pollution if the connected load of the machinery proposed to be installed exceeds 25 HP or if the nature of the machinery and installation are such that it may cause nuisance or pollution; and
(c) a report of the Divisional Fire Officer or any other officer authorised by him regarding the adequacy of fire prevention and fire fighting measures planned if the proposed industry involves the use of high tension power or inflammable or explosive materials:
provided that, no report under clause (b) shall be called for in respect of any industry if the applicant produces a declaration recommended by an officer of the Industries Department authorised in this behalf or by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board to the effect that such industry would not cause pollution.
(5) The grant of permission under this section,--
(a) Shall be subject to the conditions to be observed in respect of the replacement of machinery the levy of fees and to such restrictions and conditions as may be prescribed;
(b) Shall not be deemed as exempted from observing the provisions contained in section 235 (F) and 235 (H) or 235 (P) and 235 (Q)] 69A[(6) If any order, on an application for permission under this section is not communicated to the applicant within thirty days from the date of receipt of application by the Secretary, the application shall be deemed to have been allowed for the period required in the application subject to the Act, rules and bye laws and all conditions which would have been imposed and if any violation is noticed later,the Secretary shall have the power to cancel the licence after giving a show cause notice to the applicant stating the reason for such cancellation and after examining the submission if any, made within the time specified in the said notice and on such cancellation the Secretary may impose a penalty on the applicant for an amount not exceeding rupees five lakhs.]
67. Original Section 233 renumbered as sub-section (1) of that section by ibid.
68. Substituted for the words "rules" by Act 13 of 1999, w.e.f.
24/03/1999.
2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 15
69. Sub-sections (2) (3) (4) & (5) added by Act 13 of 1999, w.e.f. 24/03/1999.
69A. Inserted by Act 14 of 2018 (w.e.f. 20/10/2017). 69B. Substituted by Act 14 of 2018 (w.e.f. 20/10/2017). 69C. Omitted by Act 14 of 2018 (w.e.f. 20/10/2017). Prior to the amendment it read as "or refusing".
69D. Substituted by Act 14 of 2018 (w.e.f. 20/10/2017). Prior to the amendment it read as "Village Panchayat".
11. A reading of above extracted provision substantiates that, the Secretary, on receiving an application to establish a factory/install machinery, has to conduct an enquiry under sub-section (3) of Section 233 and then submit a report to the Village Panchayat regarding any objection based on the density of the population or if it would cause any nuisance or pollution to the people. Then, the Village Panchayat has to grant permission either absolutely or conditionally as it thinks fit. Before granting permission, the Secretary shall obtain and consider reports from the statutory authorities mentioned under sub-section (4) of Section 233.
12. It is pertinent to note that, by Act 14 of 2018, the words "or refusing" have been consciously omitted by the 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 16 legislature from the erstwhile sub-section (4) of Section 233 of the Act. Thus, it is to be inferred and understood that an application filed under Section 233 has to be absolutely or conditionally allowed and cannot be rejected.
13. In the case at hand, Ext.R1 (d) application, though said to be not considered in the counter affidavit, is rejected by Ext.R1(e) decision and Ext.P11 letter principally for the reason that the functioning of the Plant would cause health problems to the people of the locality. This finding is based on assumptions and conjectures, and prima facie without considering the impact of Act 14 of 2018. The decision-making process stands vitiated because it is without following the procedure contemplated under Section 233 of the Act and without considering the reports of the competent statutory authorities.
14. On a consideration of the facts and the 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 17 materials on record, and that the above pertinent questions were not considered by the respondents 1 and 2 before the passing of the impugned orders, I am convinced that the alternative statutory remedy is not efficacious and this is a fit case to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, also particularly since the decision-making process is erroneous. Accordingly, I hold that the 2nd respondent has to consider Ext.R1(d) application afresh, after considering the scope and purport of the above provision and the materials on record.
In the aforesaid circumstances, I allow the writ petition by quashing Ext.R1(e) decision and the consequential Ext.P11 letter, and directing the Secretary to reconsider Ext.R1(d) application afresh as per the procedure laid down under Section 233, after adverting to the contentions of the parties. The petitioners are 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 18 permitted to produce the entire pleadings in this writ petition before the 2nd respondent with a copy of this judgment. The respondents 1 and 2 are directed to reconsider Ext.R1(d) application, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 60 days from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The parties are permitted to file their written submissions with the supporting materials before the Village Panchayat, who in turn shall reconsider the matter, untrammelled by any observations made by this Court in this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rmm/10/7/2025 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 19 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21247/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 03.05.2025 ISSUED TO MURALEEDHARAN NAIR Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE/USE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 03.05.2025 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY SRI. VISHNU TO THE PETITIONERS DATED 07.05.2025 Exhibit P4 . TRUE COPY OF THE INVOICE DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED TO 1ST APPELLANT THAJUDHEEN Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER/CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY AMMAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 07.06.2024 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD TO THE PETITIONER DATED 13.03.2023 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT STATION OFFICER, FIRE AND RESCUE STATION, VENJARAMOOD TO THE PETITIONERS DATED 10.02.2025 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FACTORIES AND BOILERS DATED 25.09.2024 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.
1244/2024 DATED 07.10.2024 Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HEALTH) DATED 06.02.2025 Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS DATED 30.5.2025 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.
23320/2024 DATED 09.08.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
Exhibit R3 (b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. C2-1448/2024- 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 20 GME ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER DATED 24.05.2024.
Exhibit R3 (c) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE HEALTH INSPECTOR FAMILY HEALTH CENTRE, VAMANAPURAM TO THE 4 TH RESPONDENT DATED 27.06.2024.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R 1 [ b ] A true copy of the letter issued by the Secretary of Nellanad Grama Panchayat dated 22..6..2024 Exhibit R 1 [ c ] A true copy of the judgment reported in 2024 KHC Online 1325 Exhibit R 1 [ d ] A true copy of the relevant pages of application dated nil Exhibit R 1 [ e ] A true copy of the decision of the Nellanad Grama Panchayath committee dated
22..5..2025 Exhibit R 1 [ a ] A true copy of Photographs of the hot mix plant Exhibit R 1 [ f ] A true copy of the complaint dated
6..3..2017 Exhibit R 1 [ g ] A true copy of the stop memo dated 3.4.2017 issued to Sudheer S by the Nellanad Grama Panchayat Exhibit R 1 [ h ] A true copy of the relevant pages of Appeal dated 10..05..2017 Exhibit R 1 [ i ] A true copy of the decision of Nellanad Grama panchayat dated 10.5.2017 Exhibit R 1 [ j ] A true copy of the letter issued by Secretary of Nelland Grama Panchayat dated 11.5..2017 Exhibit R 1 [ k ] A true copy pf the order passed by Honourable Tribunal for Local Self Government Institution dated 16.5.2017 in I.A. No. 858 of 2017 in Revision Petition No. 55 of 2017 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P12 True copy of letter dated 09.02.2017 of the Secretary to the Pollution Control Board Exhibit P13 True copy of letter dated 09.02.2017 of 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 21 the Secretary to the District Medical Officer Exhibit P14 True copy of the letter dated 17.04.2017 of District Medical Officer to the Secretary of the panchayath Exhibit P15 True copy of the consent to operate issued by the Pollution control Board dated 04.05.2017 Exhibit P16 True copy of letter dated 03.04.2017 issued by the Secretary of the panchayath to Sudheers S Exhibit P17 True copy of letter dated 11.05.2017 along with resolution dated 10.05.2017 of the panchayath Exhibit P18 True copy of the stay order dated 16.05.2017 passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in IA.858/2017 in Revision Petition.No.55/2017 Exhibit P19 True copy of letter dated 29.05.2017 issued by the panchayath to Sudheer Exhibit P20 True copy of the judgment in WP(c).No.20228/2017 dated 28.06.2017 Exhibit P21 True copy of application dated 28.01.2018 for permission under Sec. 233 of the Panchayath Raj Act for establishment of the unit Exhibit P22 True copy of D and O license application dated 24.01.2018 submitted before the panchayath Exhibit P23 True copy of the acknowledgment of registration for firms dated 04.06.2022 issue dby Department of Registration to N and T Tar Hotmix plant Exhibit P24 True copy of the rent agreement executed between the owners of the property namely Vishnu and Geetha Rani and petitioners dated 20.04.2022 Exhibit P25 True copy of stop memo dated 16.06.2022 issued by the panchayath Exhibit P26 True copy of the consent to establish issued by the Kerala State Pollution control Board dated 25.07.2022 Exhibit P27 True copy of stop memo dated 24.01.2023 2025:KER:50935 WP(C) NO. 21247 OF 2025 22 issued by the Panchayath Exhibit P28 True copy for acknowledgment receipt issued by the panchayath dated 30.06.2022 Exhibit P29 True copy of order in IA 436/2023 in Appeal 157/2023 dated 18.03.2023 of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions Exhibit P30 True copy order dated 13.3.2023 of the Pollution Control Board Exhibit P31 True copy of application for license dated 21.06.2024 submitted by the petitioner Exhibit P32 True copy of the acknowledgment certificate dated 25.6.2024 issued by Department of Industries and Commerce Exhibit P33 True copy of building tax receipt dated 06.05.2025 issued by the Nellanad Gramapanchayath Exhibit P34 True copy of sanitary certificate dated 23.6.2025 issued by the Health Inspector Vamanapuram Health Centre Exhibit P35 True copy of proceedings of Taluk Land Board, Nedumangad, No.K2-76486/92 dated 30.06.2012 along with typed copy