HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A.D RAMAKRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
C.T SUNITHA – Respondent
Abdul Rehim,J
The 6th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant herein.
The 1st respondent herein is the writ petitioner and respondents 2 to 6
are the respondents 1 to 5 in the writ petition.
2.
Challenge in the writ petition was against Exts.P2, P3, P8
and P9 proceedings. The 1st respondent/writ petitioner was
constructing a residential building after obtaining a building permit
from the Grama Panchayath. Ext.P2 is a notice issued by the 2nd
respondent directing the 5th respondent to take steps for stoppage of
construction of the septic tank of the said building by the writ
petitioner. It is stated that, the direction was issued based on a
compliant lodged by the appellant herein and based on a report
obtained from the Deputy District Medical Officer, Malappuram, that
the septic tank is being constructed without keeping the distance of
15 Meters from the nearest drinking water source, as stipulated under
the Public Health Act and that there are chances of polluting the
drinking water source. Ext.P3 is the consequential stop memo issued
by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath requesting the writ
petitioner to stop the
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.