Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
SOMAVALLY – Appellant
Versus
NEDUVATHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 24542/2011
Writ - Sawmill Operations - Pollution Control Act - Section 13 - The court allowed the petitioner to construct enclosures for the sawmill pending civil suits, highlighting provisions to balance operational continuity and environmental compliance.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner operates a sawmill inherited from her deceased husband. Following complaints about pollution, the Pollution Control Board directed the petitioner to enclose the sawmill. The petitioner sought to comply but faced obstacles due to ongoing civil disputes regarding property.
Finding of the Court:
The court permitted the petitioner to build the required enclosures to mitigate pollution while ensuring it did not affect the ongoing civil suit regarding property disputes, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with environmental regulations.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be allowed to construct enclosures for the sawmill to prevent pollution amid ongoing civil litigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that allowing the construction of enclosures was a necessary step to mitigate pollution and comply with regulatory directives, without encroaching on ongoing civil litigation rights.
Final Decision: Both writ petitions are disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
J U D G M E N T
Both the writ petitions have been filed by the same person.
The prayers in W.P.(C)No. 24542 of 2011 are as follows:
“i. Issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records leading to Ext.P8 and to quash the same.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondent to grant time for the petitioner to obtain necessary certificates from the authorities within a stipulated time frame and allow to function the sawmill till them, in the interest of justice.
iii.
And iv. issue any other writ or order as is deemed fit by this Honourable Court in the greater interest of justice. “
2. In view of the subsequent developments, the very same petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P. (C)No. 18006 of 2012, wherein the following reliefs are sought for.
“i. issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records leading to Ext.P20 and to quash the same.
ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to grant time for the petitioner for complying with the Ext.P13 direction, till the disposal of the Ext.P19 by the Honourable Munsiff Court Kottarakkara and allow the petitioner to function the sawmill till them, in the interest of justice.
And iii. issue any other writ or order as is deemed fit by this Honourable Court in the greater interest of justice.”
3. The respondents have entered appearance and resisted the reliefs sought for.
4. On going through the facts and figures, it is seen that the petitioner is running a Saw Mill , which originally was being run by her husband, who took his last breath on 25.04.2002, after which, it is being conducted by the petitioner.
5. The additional respondent No.2 in W.P.(C)No. 24542 of
2011, who is an immediate neighbour, had preferred a complaint before the concerned authorities alleging 'dust and sound pollution' against the Saw Mill of the petitioner. On considering the same, the Pollution Control Board inspected the premises and issued Ext.P13 order, operative portion of which is extracted below:
“ During the inspection referred above, it was noticed there is emanation of dust to the surrounding area including to the residential building of the complainant as there is no proper enclosure provided for the saw mill. In this circumstance, you are requested to enclose the Northern, eastern & western sides of the shed with brick wall upto roof level and report within 2 weeks from the receipt of this notice. ”
6. It is submitted that the petitioner could not comply with the above direction, in view of Ext.P10 order in O.S. 37/2010 of the Munsiff's Court, Kottarakkara, which was filed by the petitioner referring to the encroachment into the property. The concerned local authority has also directed the petitioner to produce the requisite sanction, so as to renew the licence. As a matter of fact, the licence is still to be granted.
7. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has filed Ext.P19 I.A. (in W.P.(C)No. 18006 of 2012) before the Civil Court seeking for permission to close the three sides of the Saw Mill (North, West and South) using bricks, as insisted by the Pollution Control Board vide Ext.P13, so as to abate the sound and dust pollution, if any, during the pendency of the civil suit. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to construct the brick wall to prevent the sound and dust pollution within the petitioner's property and without encroaching into the disputed extent, which forms the subject matter of the pending civil suit. It is made clear that this will be subject to the result of the verdict to be passed by the Civil Court. It is also made clear that, subject to satisfaction of the requirements in Ext.P13, it is open for the petitioner to approach the Pollution Control Board as well as the concerned Local Authority for re-inspection/further steps.
Both the writ petitions are disposed of P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
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
