THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
M. H. Ahammed Kunju – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, Rep. by Its Secretary, Local Self Government – Respondent
"C.R."
1. The petitioner in the first among the captioned matters is referred to as the 'operator' and the petitioners in the latter, the 'objectors'.
2. The operator, who, even according to the objectors, has a saw mill, later applied for consent to install machinery with motor capacity of 84 HP to run a pealing and plywood manufacturing unit in addition to the existing saw mill and furniture unit. The panchayat refused it as per decision dated 17.12.2008. The operator appealed against that decision to the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. That was allowed on 20.3.2009, setting aside the decision of the panchayat and directing the panchayat to pass fresh proper orders, as per law, by strictly following the procedure prescribed by Section 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, hereinafter referred to as the 'KPR Act', for short.
3. The objectors and other local residents had, by that time, placed objections to the grant of licence. The said objections were carried to the different authorities. Ultimately, the panchayat again decided to refuse permit for the additional installation by resolution dated 15.5.2009. The operator moved the Green Channel Clearance
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.