SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 15340

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SAJI P M – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 29871 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT), SRI.A.JOSEPH GEORGE (AZHIKKAKATH)
For the Respondents: SRI.P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE, SRI.SAJI VARGHESE KAKKATTUMATTATHIL, SHRI.N.K.KARNIS

Operation of poultry without necessary licenses is illegal and subject to closure by authorities until compliance.

Headnote:This writ petition seeks a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing respondents to close an illegally operated chicken farm. The court found that no license was obtained by the 7th respondent, thus prohibiting operation until compliance. The petitioners may challenge the pollution consent if aggrieved. Thus, the writ petition is disposed of.

Table of Content
1. petition seeks closure of illegal operation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court notes no license obtained, operation prohibited. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i) Call for the records leading to the case.

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents to take urgent steps to close down the illegally operated chicken farm by the 7th respondent, within a time frame as may be stipulated by this Hon’ble Court.

iii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 6th respondent to cancel the P5 acknowledgment certificate illegally obtained by the 7th respondent within a time frame as may be stipulated by this Hon’ble Court. 11 iv) Dispense with filing of the English Translation of Vernacular documents.

v) Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case.

(SIC)

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration on

26.11.2025, this Court passed the following order:

“Admittedly, no license is obtained by the 7th respondent from the 3rd respondent Panchayat. Therefore, till license is obtained from the 3rd respondent, the 7th respondent shall not conduct chicken farm. If there is any violation of this order, the 3rd respondent will do the needful with the aid of the Police, if necessary.

3. Now, admittedly the Pollution Control Board granted consent to operate, as evident by Ext.P15. Even now, the petitioners have some grievance.

If the petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P15, they are free to challenge the same in accordance with law. I make it clear that the 7th respondent shall comply the conditions in Ext.P15 and other permits, if any.

With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of.

sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top