Jashi Lorance vs The Kerala State Pollution ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 10283 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

  FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                   WP(C).No.7879 OF 2021(H)


PETITIONER:

              JASHI LORANCE,
              AGED 50 YEARS, W/O. CHITTILAPILLY KOKKAT
              LORANCE, RESIDING IN THE ADDRESS CHITTILAPILLY
              KOKKAT HOUSE, KADUPASSERY VILLAGE DESOM,
              KADUPASSERY P.O, IRINJALAKUDA,
              THRISSUR DISTRICT - 690683.

              BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

RESPONDENT:

              THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,
              HAVING OFFICE AT MAJESTIC SQUARE, 3RD FLOOR,
              PARAVATANI, OLLUKARA P.O,
              THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680655.

              SRI.NAVEEN SC

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.7879 of 2021
                                    -2-




                      W.P.(C) No.7879 of 2021
                -------------------------------------------


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner is running a chicken farm after obtaining

consent from the kerala State Pollution Control Board (the

Board). Ext.P2 is the consent issued to the petitioner by the

Board. In terms of Ext.P3, having regard to the complaints

received against the chicken farm of the petitioner, the Board

directed the petitioner to reduce the number of birds in the farm

and to obtain variation of the consent granted by the Board. In

the light of Ext.P3, the petitioner submitted an application for

variation of the consent. It is alleged by the petitioner that the

application preferred by the petitioner for variation of the consent

is not being acted upon by the Board. The petitioner, therefore,

seeks appropriate directions in this regard in the writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

also the learned Standing Counsel for the Board.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the W.P.(C) No.7879 of 2021

case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition

directing the respondent to consider the application preferred by

the petitioner for variation of the consent, within one month from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered

accordingly.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE YKB W.P.(C) No.7879 of 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SANITARY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC HEALTH AUTHORITY, VELURKARA NAMELY HEALTH INSPECTOR, PUBLIC HEALTH CENTER, THRISSUR DISTRICT, DATED 28.9.2015.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT ISSUED DATED 21.09.18.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 11.01.2020.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 27.8.2019.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 25.1.2021.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL.