JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers : (i) “Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction commanding and compelling the 2nd respondent to issue license to the petitioner to operate crusher unit notwithstanding the erroneous mentioning made in Exhibit-P3 and P5 with respect to the crusher unit;

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction commanding and compelling the 1st respondent to strike-off the wrong mentioning made with respect to the crusher unit as quarry in Exhibit-P3;

iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or Direction commanding and compelling the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on Exhibit-P10.” [sic]

2. The petitioner is the Managing partner of the partnership namely M/s.Pathanpara Stone Crusher situated in Kannur District. According to the petitioner, the crusher unit has been functioning with all statutory requirements on the basis of the permission granted by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. A quarrying unit has also been functioning near the crusher unit is the submission. The 2nd respondent- Panchayat issued licence to the petitioner's crusher unit and the said licence was renewed from time to time. When the petitioner was about to file renewal application on 23.02.2023, it is submitted that the 1st respondent has issued a proceeding directing the petitioner to stop the functioning of the quarry mistakenly citing it as a crusher unit is the submission. The 1st respondent issued Ext.P3 on a mistaken notion that the quarry and the crusher unit are one and the same, though it is not is the submission of the petitioner. In fact, the crusher unit is functioning is having a separate entity and the functioning of the same is entirely different from that of the quarry is the submission of the petitioner. Since the licence was about to expire the petitioner submitted an application for renewal of the licence with all necessary compliance is the submission. The 2nd respondent by a communication bearing No.SC2-

1003/23 dated 03.03.2023 requested the 1st respondent to give a clarification with respect to the issuance of licence to the crusher unit. The 1st respondent has not given any reply and consequently, the 2nd respondent is not taking any action.

Hence, this writ petition.

3. When this writ petition came up for consideration on

14.02.2024, this Court passed the following order :

“Admit. Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 and 3. Issue notice by speed post to the 2nd respondent.

There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to provide the necessary clarification sought by the 2nd respondent in Ext. P6, within a period of two weeks. Post on 06.03.2024.”

4. Consequently, it is submitted by the Government Pleader that as per proceedings No. DCKNR/2435/2023-DM6 dated 19.02.2024, the District Collector already communicated the necessary clarification. If that is the case, the 2nd respondent has to take consequential steps in the renewal application.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :

1) The 2nd respondent is directed to consider the renewal application submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in it as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, in view of the clarification No. DCKNR/243/2023-DM6 dated 19.02.2024.

2) The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition with exhibits before the 2nd respondent for compliance.

SD/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

SKS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5769/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE INTEGRATED CONSENT TO OPERATE-RENEWAL ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 03/11/2023 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LINCENCE ISSUED DY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NO. A2- 1931/2022/2022-23-178 DATED

06/05/2022 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.

DCKNR/2435/2023-DM6 DA