DR JAYASREE P.R., v. VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
Court: High Court of Kerala
Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Kerala judgment dated 2025-03-10. DR JAYASREE P.R., v. VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT,. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A. A. TH MONDAY, THE 10 DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 10275 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: DR JAYASREE P. R. , AGED 55 YEARS W/O. SANJEEV VISWAMBARAN, SHREEWILL, T. C. 14/721, MENONS COLONY, MUTTADA P. O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695025 BY ADVS. K. B. PRADEEP JEEVAN KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT/S: 1 VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALAYINKEEZH P. O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695571 2 ANILKUMAR, SOWMYA BHAVAN, THOTTIKARA, IRATTA KALUNKU, MALYAINKEEZHU P. O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695571 3 ADDL. R3: THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PLAMOODU JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004. ( IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 22/08/23 IN IA2/23).
4 SOWMYA ( SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEADED ) SOWMYA ,BHAVAN,THOTTIKARA, IRATTA KALUNK ,MALAYAINKEEZU PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ( SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEADED ) 2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 BY ADVS. S. ANEESH SAIJO HASSAN BENOJ C AUGUSTIN RAFEEK. V. K. U. M. HASSAN BINCY JOB SALMAN FARIS DEVI. R. SENS RAJALAKSHMI R. SARITHA K. OTHER PRESENT: Shri. T. Naveen, S. C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10. 03. 2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 J U D G M E N T st The petitioner is the resident of the 1 respondent, Grama Panchayath, and the grievance highlighted in this writ petition nd pertains to the conduct of a cattle farm by the 2 respondent in the property adjacent to the property of the petitioner, without any licenses and sanctions as contemplated under law. It is also the nd case of the petitioner that the activities of the 2 respondent is causing serious pollution as well. st 2.
A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1 respondent wherein the details of inspections conducted in the premises of the nd 2 respondent, on various dates are mentioned. The fact that the functioning of cattle farm with several cows including calves are specifically highlighted therein. It was also mentioned that there is nd no residence within 50 meters radius of the 2 respondent’s property. It was also averred that there was lack of waste management facilities such as bio-gas system, septic tank and soak pit in the said farm. nd 3. Accordingly, a notice has been issued to the 2 nd respondent, to which 2 respondent submitted a reply on 02. 05. 2023 stating that the land on the cattle sheds are located as wetland and therefore, they have submitted an application before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nedumangad for classifying 2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 the property as ‘Dry land’ in the revenue records. The said application is under process.
It was also averred in the said counter nd affidavit that, the 2 respondent and his family are depending upon the cattle farm entirely, for their livelihood and therefore, an immediate closure of the farm will have adverse impact on their life. 4. A report was submitted by the Pollution Control Board as directed by this Court. It is discernible from the said report that the Officers of the Pollution Control Board conducted an inspection nd in the said farm of the 2 respondent on 02. 06. 2023. During the said inspection, the farm was operating without obtaining a Consent to Operate from the Board by rearing 24 numbers of cattle. The distance criteria to the nearest residence was met by the unit. The overall housekeeping of the unit was unsatisfactory as the cow dung mixed with water was deposited in the premises. Foul odour was experienced around the farm. There was no bio-gas plant, septic tank and soak-pit in the unit. Accordingly, Annex.
R3(a) nd was issued to the 2 respondent by the Pollution Control Board. It is also averred that as per Annex. R3(d), the Pollution Control Board st had issued a direction to the Secretary to the 1 respondent to take nd necessary steps against the 2 respondent for conducting the cattle farm without obtaining any Consent to operate, but no action is seen taken as well. 2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 5. I have heard Sr. K. B. Pradeep, the learned counsel for the st petitioner, Sri. S. Aneesh, the learned counsel for the 1 nd respondent, Sri. Saiju Hassan for the 2 respondent and rd Sri. T. Naveen for the additional 3 respondent Pollution Control Board. 6. Today, when the matter came up for consideration, the st Standing counsel for the 1 respondent Panchayath submitted that, after submitting the counter affidavit, they conducted an inspection during the month of January 2025, and it was found that nd the 2 respondent had installed a biogas plant.
However, on nd consideration of the relevant records, it is evident that the 2 respondent is conducting the cattle farm with cattle more than in 20 numbers. The said fact is not disputed by any of the respondents. rd 7. In fact, in the report of 3 respondent, it is specifically averred that, at the time of inspection, during the month of March 2023, they found 24 cattle. Therefore, it was obligatory on the part nd of the 2 respondent to obtain a trade license from the Panchayath and also to secure a Consent to Operate, from the Pollution Control nd Board. Evidently, no attempts have been made by the 2 respondent to obtain such a licence so far. This writ petition has been submitted by the petitioners in 21. 03. 2023 and more than 2 2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 nd th years have elapsed. Even now, the 2 respondent and 4 respondent are conducting the cattle farm without any licence. 8.
Therefore, under no circumstances, the conduct of the nd th cattle farm by the 2 and 4 respondents without obtaining statutory licenses/consent from the authorities concerned can be nd th justified. However, considering the fact that, the 2 and 4 respondents are depending upon the income generated from the farm for their livelihood, a reasonable time can be granted to them to obtain the license. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the nd th respondents 1 and 3 to ensure that the 2 and 4 respondents are st obtaining valid license from the 1 respondent and Consent to rd operate from the 3 respondent within a period of three months nd from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. In case the 2 th and 4 respondent are not obtaining license and Consent from the authorities, as referred to above, necessary steps shall be taken by st rd the 1 and 3 respondent to close down the cattle farm. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A. A. JUDGE SM/24.
03 2025:KER:20333 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10275/2023 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE 1 ST RESPONDENT. DT 02- 03-2022 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE TO THE 2 ND RESPONDENT DATED 04- 2022 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 07-01-2023 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REPLY DATED 04-02-2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE COW DUNG/SLURRY DISCHARGED FROM THE 2 ND RESPONDENT’S COW FARM STAGNATED AROUND PETITIONER’S LAND TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14-06-2023, ISSUED BY THE STATE PCB TO THE 2 ND RESPONDENT AND HIS WIFE TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3 RD RESPONDENT DATED 25/09/2023 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DT 09-01-2024 ISSUED BY THE 3 RD RESPONDENT THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING COLLECTION OF WATER PERMEATED THROUGH THE BOTTOM OF COMPOUND WALL FROM THE TRENCHES MADE BY THE 2 ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE COMPOUND WALL.
THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING A BIG PIPE FIXED BY THE 2 ND RESPONDENT TO DISCHARGE THE COW DUNG AND THE URINE MIXED WATER TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 22/05/2024 ISSUED BY THE 3 RD RESPONDENT. 2025:KER:20333 WP(C)No. 10275 of 2023 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R3(a) True copy of the direction letter dated 14-6- 2023 issued by the Board to the 2nd respondent. Annexure R3(b) True copy of the Standard Operating Procedure dated 15-12-2020 issued by the Board. Annexure R3(c) True copy of the Letter dated 23-9-2023 (show cause notice) dated 23-9-2023 issued by the Board to the 2nd respondent. Annexure R3(d) True copy of the Letter dated 22-5-2024 issued by the Board to the Secretary of the Vilavoorkal Panchayat.
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.