RENADEVAN Vs. EZHUPUNNA GRAMA PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since 1985, petitioner has been conducting a piggery in his property with licence from the Panchayat, NOC of the District Medical Officer and consent issued by the Pollution Control Board. According to the petitioner, in 2007, when the licence became due for renewal, for reasons which are only political, at the instance of respondents 6 to 8, it was renewed by Ext.P1 order with a condition that the consent of the Pollution Control Board for the period subsequent to 1.7.2009 should be produced. The period of the licence thus renewed was upto 31.3.2010.

(2.) According to the petitioner, again at the instance of respondents 6 to 8, by Ext.P2, the Environmental Engineer of the Pollution Control Board refused to grant consent to operate the farm on the allegation that the petitioner had not provided satisfactory facilities for treatment of polluted effluents and was causing nuisance to the public by way of sound pollution.

(3.) Aggrieved by Ext.P2 order of the Environmental Engineer, petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal before the Appellate Authority and the appeal is still pending consideration. While so, Ext.P4 notice dated 26.8.2009 was issued by the Panchayat, calling upon the petitioner to show cause why in the light of Ext.P2 order, Ext.P1 licence shall not be cancelled. He was required to submit his explanation within 14 days of receipt of the notice. Petitioner submits that Ext.P4 notice was served on him by registered post with acknowledgment due. Ext.P10 is the cover enclosing Ext.P4 which shows that it was delivered to the petitioner on 31.10.2009.