Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
JACOB THOMAS – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER ALAPPUZHA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seeking court intervention on environmental grounds. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court emphasizes need for compliance with orders and relevant actions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. final ruling directs necessary follow-ups by authorities. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"(I) To issue a writ of Mandamus directing the first and second respondents to implement Exhibit P2, P6, and P8 orders and thereby stop the illegal and objectionable functioning of the prawns peeling shed conducted by the 4th respondent.
(II) To grant the entire costs of the writ petition.
(III) To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the nature and circumstances of this case."
[SIC]
2. Petitioners are the permanent residents in Ward No.VII of Thaicattussery Grama Panchayat. The 4th respondent is conducting a prawn peeling shed situated very close to the petitioners’ property, is the submission. The above business of the 4th respondent is causing great nuisance to the petitioners and other residents, is the submission. It is also submitted that the 4th respondent is conducting the said business without obtaining the r
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
