ORDER S. Sankarasubban, J. 1. Petitioner is the owner of 11 cents of property in Sy.No.53/3 of KadakkavoorVillage. He applied to the Anjengo Panchayat for licence for manufacturing iceand for constructing a building for the plant. Ext. P1 will show that thePanchayat had permitted him to install 50 H.P. electric motor. It will furthershow that the District Medical Officer and the District Fire Force Officer hadgranted their approval. Ext. P2 is the order issued by the Executive Officerseparately on the basis of Ext. P1 sanctioning construction of the work placeas well as starting of industry for manufacturing ice. Ext. P5 registrationcertificate issued by the Director of Industries and Commerce will show thatthe product to be manufactured is ice blocks and the raw materials are freshwater and ammonia gas. Petitioner also applied for electricity connection andthe Electricity Board granted the same by Ext. P6. On the basis of the above,petitioner has started construction of the building. 2. According to the petitioner, there were frequent interference from the fifthrespondent President of Anchuthengu Muslim Juma Ath during theconstruction of the building. The proposed ice plant and the mosque aresituated on the opposite sides of the road. When there was interference by thefifth respondent, petitioner got police protection from the Revenue DivisionalOfficer. Subsequently, petitioner received copy of the communicationaddressed by the District Collector to Circle Inspector of Police, Attingal. Thisrefers to a complaint by the fifth respondent. It is stated that on enquiry, it wasfound that there is every likelihood of Juma Ath being polluted by dirty waterfrom the proposed ice plant and also the entire atmosphere will be pollutedwith foul smell of fish. This may create difficulties for those who go to JumaAth and ultimately result in communal tension. On the basis of this, CircleInspector of Police was directed to see that the construction of the building isnot made further. Subsequently, petitioner approached the District Collectorand sought permission for completion of the construction of the building andundertook that he would not start manufacturing process until he hears fromthe District Collector. 3. It is seen that on the basis of the complaint of the fifth respondent, DistrictCollector made enquiries through the Circle Inspector of Police and on thebasis of his personal inspection, District Collector passed Ext. 3. It is seen that on the basis of the complaint of the fifth respondent, DistrictCollector made enquiries through the Circle Inspector of Police and on thebasis of his personal inspection, District Collector passed Ext. P9 order bywhich he came to the conclusion that if the ice plant is allowed to be operatedin the area, there is every likelihood of the neighbouring area being pollutedand further lorries carrying fish will be parked in front of the Juma Ath and thismay ultimately lead to communal tension. By Ext. P9, District Collectordirected the Executive Officer of the Panchayat to cancel the licence. AgainstExt. P9, petitioner filed representation before the Government. But theGovernment dismissed the same by means of Ext. P10 order. Petitioner praysfor quashing of Exts.P7, P9 and P10 and for a direction not to interfere withthe construction of the ice plant by the petitioner. 4. Counter affidavits have been filed by the District Collector as well as by thefirst respondent filed a complaint on the basis of which enquiry was started. InPara.13 of the counter affidavit it is stated that there was no provision fordrainage facilities to discharge the effluent from the factory premises. Thelorries laden with fish may step in the premises of the factory near the Mosquethereby flowing foul water from the lorries to the road and from there to theMosque's compound and if such a situation is permitted, it may create tensionbetween Muslim and Christian Communities. The law and order authoritiescannot put the issue of experiment. In Para.14 of the counter affidavit, it isstated that there was no provision for drainage facilities to discharge theeffluent from the factory premises. The factory may become potential sourceof perpetual nuisance. In the counter affidavit filed by the fifth respondent, it isstated that if the plant is allowed to come into existence, it will cause nuisanceand further lead to communal tension. 5. I went through the records of the case. On the basis of the instructions ofthe District Collector, Circle Inspector of Police made inspection and he filed areport dated 3-5-1988. It is seen from that report that petitioner purchased 11cents of property from one Rugmini. Before that it belonged to another person.At that time in this 11 cents of property trade in fish was going on. After thepetitioner purchased the property, he stopped fish trade. It is seen from that report that petitioner purchased 11cents of property from one Rugmini. Before that it belonged to another person.At that time in this 11 cents of property trade in fish was going on. After thepetitioner purchased the property, he stopped fish trade. It is also seen thatthe petitioner has taken loan of Rs.8,65,000/- from the State Bank ofTravancore, Kadakkavoor for the purpose of the ice plant. No doubt, CircleInspector of Police has reported that there is possibility of pollution and it mayultimately lead to communal tension. District Collector visited the site and fileda report. This is what is stated in the report: "Inspected the land. The proposedsite is right in front of a Mosque. Trucks carrying fish may be parked in front ofthe Mosque and the ......... (not legible) may also flow to the Mosque.This may in a sensitive area like Anchuthengu create problems later. Hence Iam not in the sanctioning this". 6. Thus it is seen that on a complaint filed by the Juma Ath, District Collectorhad recommended to the Panchayat to cancel the licence and on the basis ofthis recommendation, licence was cancelled. Learned counsel for thepetitioner Shri K.L. Narasimhan contended that the interference on the basis ofthe Report of the District Collector is unwarranted. Counsel submitted that the Kerala Panchayat Act deals with procedure for granting licence. He refers toS.97 of the Kerala Panchayat Act. He further submitted that before grantinglicence, no objection certificates have been obtained from the District MedicalOfficer and District Fire Force Officer. Further he submitted that the entirereasoning given by the District Collector is not based on the existing facts. It isthe result of mere imaginations. Petitioner wants to manufacture only ice andhe is making use of water and ammonia gas. There is no question of anybusiness in fish. The proposed ice plant is situated or one side of the roadwhereas Juma Ath is situated on the other side of the road and the contentionthat lorries containing fish will be parked in front of the Mosque is without anybasis. As already submitted petitioner wants to trade only in ice and there is noquestion of contaminated water flowing into the mosque. Further counselsubmitted that the petitioner would get permission from the State PollutionControl Board and he is prepared to obey the directions of the affluent flowingto the Mosque and to take all necessary steps to make the neighbourhoodpollution free. As already submitted petitioner wants to trade only in ice and there is noquestion of contaminated water flowing into the mosque. Further counselsubmitted that the petitioner would get permission from the State PollutionControl Board and he is prepared to obey the directions of the affluent flowingto the Mosque and to take all necessary steps to make the neighbourhoodpollution free. The contention that there will be communal tension is withoutany basis. If such a view is taken, it will not be possible to start any industryanywhere. 7. Learned counsel for the fifth respondent stated that petitioner has got otherproperties nearby and further there is possibility of the area beingcontaminated, which will ultimately cause nuisance to those coming to theJuma Ath. It is to prevent such a situation that the fifth respondent complained.Learned Government Pleader on the basis of the file submitted that the DistrictCollector on the basis of the reports and inspection was of the view thatsanction should not be given. 8. After hearing the parties, I am of the view that the action taken by thesecond respondent in cancelling the licence is without sufficient reasons. Hereis a project for establishing ice plant for the purpose of manufacturing ice. Iceplant has not become operational, only building has been constructed.Authority competent to grant licence has granted licence after complying withthe procedure required for the same. District Medical Officer as well as FireForce Officer have given their green signal for starting the industry. Complaintof the Juma Ath is not based on actual facts. It is not known how trade in fishwas brought into the picture. May be, ice block will be purchased for thepurpose of preserving fish and on account that persons dealing with fish maybe coming there for purchasing ice. How, the District Collector on a mere lookcame to the conclusion that lorries loaded with fish may be parked in front ofthe Juma Ath and that effluent will flow to the Mosque. If, as a matter of fact,Collector feels that the working of the ice plant may cause any pollution, hewould have directed the petitioner to take all necessary steps to abate thesame. But here the ice plant is not started manufacturing ice. District Collectorhad to test by a trial ran of the plant and then come to the conclusion that theice plant will be harmful. But here the ice plant is not started manufacturing ice. District Collectorhad to test by a trial ran of the plant and then come to the conclusion that theice plant will be harmful. On the basis of mere surmises, District Collectorcame to the conclusion that pollution will be caused if the ice plant is allowedto operate. Further according to me, District Collector was wrong in saying thatcommunal tension will be created. It is strange that a person, who is in chargeof law and order, should say that the starting of an ice plant will createcommunal tension and hence it should not be started. Authorities should takeall steps to prevent such situations. 9. Here, I refer with great respect the observations made by Kalliath, J. in thedecision reported in Manager, Fort High School v. Government of Kerala and 2 others - ILR 1991 (2) Ker. 811 - which reads thus: "A law and order situation has to be dealt with by the Government using itsprerogative powers granted by the Constitution of India. Citizens are entitled toexercise their lawful rights and for that purpose, Government is bound to giveadequate protection. Under the threat of a law and order situation, a citizencannot be denied to exercise his lawful rights. If this is permitted, it will be anindication of the failure of a constitutional Government. I feel that the primeduty of the Government is to see that every citizen is allowed to exercise hislawful rights even if large number of people are against the exercise of hislegal rights". We cannot forget the fundamental right enshrined in Art.19 of the Constitutionof India. Art.19(1)(g) of the Constitution grants fundamental right to everycitizen to exercise his profession, trade etc. Hence, according to me, Exts.P7,P9 and P10 have been passed without any basis and they are herebyquashed. 10. Since the licence granted by the Panchayat has been cancelled, petitionerhas to approach the Anjengo Panchayat again for the grant of licence.Panchayat may require the petitioner to get certificate from the State PollutionControl Board as to the precautions to be taken by the petitioner. I also herebyrecord the undertaking given that it is only manufacture of ice that is going totake place in the proposed plant. On the basis of the recommendation of theState Pollution Control Board, Panchayat may grant licence to the petitionerfor starting the industry. Original Petition is disposed of as above.