IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
C. Girishadas – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
WP(C) No. 16890 of 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks intervention against unlicensed business operations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. mandatory consideration of citizen representations by administrative bodies. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:
" A Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order writ or direction directing the 2nd and 3rd respondent to stop the illegal functioning of the poultry farm conducting by the 6th respondent without obtaining valid license from the competent authority.
B. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order writ or direction directing the 3rd to 5th respondents to consider the Exhibits.P3 to P5 representation filed by the petitioner and take appropriate action on it. C. To dispense with the filing of translation of vernacular documents.
D. To Issue such other writ, order or directions which are deemed to be fit and proper on the basis of the facts and circumstances of this case; in the interest of justice."
[SIC]
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that an illegal poultry farm is being conducted by the 6th respondent, and the 3rd respondent is not taking any action.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel appearing for the Panchayat and the Pollution Control Board. I also heard the Government Pleader.
4. The manner in which this writ petition is going to be disposed of, no notice is necessary to the 6th respondent. If the 6th respondent is aggrieved by any of the directions issued by this court, he is free to file a review petition before this court.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the poultry farm is conducted without any license, and the petitioner relied on Ext.P2 information furnished by the Panchayat under the Right to Information Act. I do not want to make any observation about the same. Petitioner has already submitted Ext.P3 before the 3rd respondent. There can be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P3 with notice to the petitioner and the 6th respondent within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
1. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P3 and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 6th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.