← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/14787/2015disposed of

Ayisha Beevi v. Municipal Secretary

2015-05-21Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2015/31ST VAISAKHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 14787 of 2015 (W) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

----------------------- AYISHA BEEVI, UMMAITHANAKAM, EEZHUVATHURUTHY AMSOM, ERIKKAMANNA DESOM, PONNANI P.O.

BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. MUNICIPAL SECRETARY, PONNANI MUNICIPALITY, PONNANI SOUTH P.O.-679 586.

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

3. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.

R1 BY ADV.SRI.S.SUJIN R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA R3 BY SRI. M.AJAY, SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).No. 14787 of 2015 (W) ------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1 - COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18.5.2015 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL ------------------------------------------ /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 14787 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The grievance of the petitioner is that the 1st respondent, who is duty bound to take immediate action on Ext.P1 representation, is keeping mum on the same. 2.

The petitioner is a resident of Ponnani Municipality, who is residing near a public road. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent has permitted a fish market to be located in the public road, just opposite to her residence. According to her, this was originally located on the side of NH 17 at Ponnani. Her grievance is that though Ext.P1 representation was submitted before the respondent panchayath ventilating her grievance, no action has been taken.

3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent municipality, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Pollution

W.P.(C) No. 14787 of 2015 ..2..

Control Board.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner confined her argument to the limited prayer for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 representation within a time frame.

In the light of the submission, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 representation after affording the petitioner and the affected parties, if any, an opportunity of being heard, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To facilitate an early action, the petitioner shall be at liberty to produce a copy of this judgment as well as a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent at the earliest. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-