Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
SAJID AYOLI – Appellant
Versus
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR/ADM COLLECTORATE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for explosives magazine rejected based on distance. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by petitioner and government pleader. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observation on compliance and terrain viability. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. final order for reconsideration of application. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Petitioner applied for establishing an explosives magazine and also for an issuance of 'No Objection Certificate' for the grant of LE-3 license. The same is rejected by Ext.P5 Order stating various reasons. Ext.P5 is under challenge.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Schedule-VII, Table-1 to the Explosives Rules, 2008 , the distance stipulated for an explosives magazine of 200 kg quantity to the nearest railway or road is 45 meters; and to the nearest dwelling house is 52 meters. In the instant case, such distance from the proposed site is 60 meters and 70 meters respectively, as found in Ext.P5 Order itself. Therefore, rejection of the license on that count cannot be sustained. Secondly, learned counsel would point out that placing reliance on the rep
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
