P.M.Basheer vs Vengola Grama Panchayath
2021 Latest Caselaw 7101 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                  WP(C).No.4999 OF 2021(Y)


PETITIONER:

              P.M.BASHEER, AGED 43 YEARS
              POOVATHUMCHUVATTIL HOUSE, NELLIKUZHI,
              ERAMALLUR, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM-686 691.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.DEEPU THANKAN
              SMT.UMMUL FIDA
              SMT.LAKSHMI SREEDHAR

RESPONDENTS:

     1        VENGOLA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
              PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM-683 554
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

     2        DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
              MALAYATTOOR DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR,
              ERNAKULAM-683 544.

              SPL.GP SANDESH RAJA
              SRI. C.A. NAVAS SC.

OTHER PRESENT:

              GP. RAVI KRISHNAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP          FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME          DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.4999 of 2021                       2




                           W.P.(C) No.4999 of 2021
                    -----------------------------------------------


                                 JUDGMENT

Petitioner has been granted Ext.P2 licence in terms of

the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Sawmills and Other Wood-based

Industrial Units) Rules, 2012 (the Rules). Ext.P2 was valid till

20.02.2021. The petitioner preferred Ext.P3 application for

renewal of Ext.P2 licence as early as on 05.01.2021. It is stated by

the petitioner that the second respondent is not considering Ext.P3

application and the petitioner is, therefore, unable to run his

industry.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

also the learned Government Pleader.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been

granted licence in terms of the Rules, and the fact that the

petitioner has preferred application well in advance for renewal of

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

directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P3 application with notice to the petitioner. Ordered

accordingly. Needless to say, until orders are passed as directed

above, the functioning of the unit shall not be interdicted.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

ds 01.03.2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE D&O LICENSE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH DATED 2.3.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.132 DATED 4.9.2019 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF THE LICENSE DATED 5.1.2021.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 8.1.2021.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19.2.2021 TO IST RESPONDENT.