Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Shifudeen vs the Pollution Control Board

Shifudeen vs The Pollution Control Board

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jul 22, 2019
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1856065

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C)/2363/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shifudeen

Respondent

The Pollution Control Board

Excerpt

.....petitioners who were residents in survey no.344/5-4 of vadakevila village at kollam, have filed this writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 to close down the factory proposed to be constructed in the land owned by the 5th respondent, covered by ext.p1 deed. the petitioners have also sought for a direction to the respondents to take immediate and proper action to stop further construction of the proposed factory in the land covered by ext.p1 deed. in the writ petition, it is alleged that the 5th respondent is attempting to start a factory for making coconut milk shake on industrial basis, in the guise of construction of a residential building.2. on 25.01.2019, when this writ petition came up forconsideration, the respective standing counsel and the learned government pleader took notice for respondents 1 to 4 and this court issued urgent notice by speed post to 5 th respondentreturnable in three weeks. this court has passed an interim orderdirecting the 3rd respondent to ensure that no activities are carried on by the 5th respondent, if she has not secured necessary w.p.(c) no.2363/2019 4 clearances from appropriate statutory authorities. the said order, which was issued for one month, was extended from time to time, which is still in force.3. a statement has been filed by the 3 rd respondent. the petitioner has also filed a reply statement.4. today, when the case is taken up for consideration,smt.ann susan george, the learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that the petitioners do not want to prosecute this writ petition further and therefore, the same may be dismissed as withdrawn.5. recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.it is made clear that this court has not expressed anything as to the legality or otherwise of the construction made by the 5th respondent in the property.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2019 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1941 WP(C).No.2363 of 2019 PETITIONERS:

1 SHIFUDEEN AGED 52 YEARS S/O.ASANARU KUNJU, JAMEELA COTTAGE, 204 A, COLLEGE NAGAR, MANAKAD, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 010. 2 BINDU AGED 30 YEARS D/O.AYYAPPAN, MADAKKAN PADINJANAN, COLLEGE NAGAR, VADAKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM-691 010. 3 SOMAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O. RAMAN, MADAKKAN PADINJANAL, COLLEGE NAGAR, VADAKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM-691 010. BY ADVS. SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEP SMT.ANN SUSAN GEORGE SMT.O.A.NURIYA SRI.D.S.LOKANATHAN

RESPONDENTS: 1 THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER-691001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOLLAM-691001. 3 THE SECRETARY KOLLAM CORPORTION, KOLLAM-691 001. 4 THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM-691 001. W.P.(C) No.2363/2019 2 5 VAHEEDHA H AGED 39 YEARS W/O. SHAMNAD, SHARJA VIHAR, VADAKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM-691 010. BY ADVS. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHAN DAS, SC. SMT.V.SHYLAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.2363/2019 3

JUDGMENT

The petitioners who were residents in survey No.344/5-4 of Vadakevila Village at Kollam, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 to close down the factory proposed to be constructed in the land owned by the 5th respondent, covered by Ext.P1 deed. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to the respondents to take immediate and proper action to stop further construction of the proposed factory in the land covered by Ext.P1 deed. In the writ petition, it is alleged that the 5th respondent is attempting to start a factory for making coconut milk shake on industrial basis, in the guise of construction of a residential building.

2. On 25.01.2019, when this writ petition came up for

consideration, the respective Standing Counsel and the learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 to 4 and this Court issued urgent notice by speed post to 5 th respondent

returnable in three weeks. This Court has passed an interim order

directing the 3rd respondent to ensure that no activities are carried on by the 5th respondent, if she has not secured necessary W.P.(C) No.2363/2019 4 clearances from appropriate statutory authorities. The said order, which was issued for one month, was extended from time to time, which is still in force.

3. A statement has been filed by the 3 rd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a reply statement.

4. Today, when the case is taken up for consideration,

Smt.Ann Susan George, the learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that the petitioners do not want to prosecute this writ petition further and therefore, the same may be dismissed as withdrawn.

5. Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything as to the legality or otherwise of the construction made by the 5th respondent in the property covered by Ext.P1 deed. Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

smp W.P.(C) No.2363/2019 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF THE LAND OF R5 DATED 14.9.17. EXHIBIT P2 THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PROJECT REPORT OF R5. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF MASS PETITION GIVEN TO R1 DATED 12.12.18. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 26.11.18 GIVEN TO THE HEALTH OFFICER OF KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF MASS PETITION GIVEN TO THE R4 DATED 24.11.18. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE PETITION GIVEN TO THE COLLECTOR, DATED 24.11.18. EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE PETITION GIVEN TO THE MINISTER FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, KERALA, DATED 24.11.18. EXHIBIT P8 THE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.06.2019. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. True Copy P.S to Judge smp

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial