Licenses and permits allow lawful operation of business; obstruction without legal basis is impermissible.

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 27^th day of November, 2025 The petitioner is the Manager of one Parackal Granites and Sands, a metal crusher unit functioning at Enadimangalam. It is the petitioner's claim that the said entity is equipped with all necessary permits and licenses for conducting a crusher unit as envisaged by the statute. However, respondents 3 to 7 and 9, are causing obstruction to the smooth functioning of the crusher unit. According to the petitioner, the said respondents are members of an association with the name 'Jai Bheem'.

2. Learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the petitioner is equipped with all necessary licenses and permits, and that as per the report received, there is obstruction caused to the functioning of the petitioner's unit.

3. Learned counsel for respondents 3 to 7 and 9 would submit that serious nuisance is caused by the plying of heavy vehicles by the petitioner's unit, wherein the road is having a width of only 3 meters. The area is one which is having heavy traffic and hence the plying of the vehicles is causing serious hardship to the people of the locality. Learned counsel would, however, deny that physical obstruction is caused by the above referred respondents, simultaneous with asserting the rights of the said respondents to object to the plying of vehicles in a democratic manner.

4. Learned counsel for the 10^th respondent/Panchayath would submit that the road in question is included in the asset register of the Panchayath.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds that the functioning of a unit, which is being run equipped with all licenses and permits, cannot be obstructed, except in accordance with law. Physical obstruction, if any, caused by any of the respondents is liable to be prevented. In the circumstances, there will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to grant effective police protection to the petitioner for the functioning of the unit, as also, for plying the vehicles. Respondents 1 and 2 will ensure that the obstruction, if any, caused in the road in question is removed. This Court, however, clarifies that the rights of respondents 3 to 7 and 9 to object to the activities of the petitioner in accordance with law will stand reserved. It will be open for the competent authority - if the same is found necessary - to impose restrictions on the number of lorries etc, to be plied by the petitioner in a day.

The Writ Petition (Civil) will stand disposed of as above.