Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J
SUMALATHA B – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to noc rejection for petroleum outlet. (Para 1) |
| 2. concerns raised regarding safety due to fireworks shop. (Para 2) |
| 3. arguments presented by both parties regarding noc compliance. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's analysis on definitions and safety distances. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court allows writ petition; orders issuance of noc. (Para 9) |
J U D G M E N T
1. The petitioner is challenging the Ext.P9 Order by which NOC sought by the 6th respondent under Rule 144 of the Petroleum Rules, 2000 , for establishing petroleum retail outlet was rejected. The 7th respondent/PESO granted Ext.P1 Clearance dated 31.12.2024 to the 6th respondent in order to enable the petitioner to start a petroleum outlet on 1.20 Acres of land in Re-Survey No.438/1B of Madikai Village, Hosdurg Taluk, Kasaragod District. Madikai Grama Panchayat issued Ext.P2 NOC dated 25.05.2024. The 5th respondent/District Police Chief issued Ext.P3 NOC dated 24.06.2024. The District Fire Officer issued Ext.P4 NOC dated 27.07.2024.
2. The application for NOC was rejected in Ext.P9, finding that there exists a fireworks shop within a distance of 10 meters, which has got permission to store 500 kgs of fireworks;
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
