JUDGMENT : P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. 1. The alleged callous inaction on the part of the competent authority, who has been arrayed as the respondents, in considering Ext.P4 application preferred by the petitioner Upadesaka Samithy in granting sanction for display of fire works in connection with the Arattupuzha Pooram scheduled on 2nd, 7th and 8th of April, 2017 forms the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 24.03.2017, instruction was sought to be obtained and the case was listed yesterday. The case was adjourned further to this date, so as to facilitate procuring of relevant materials regarding the state of affairs as on date. 3. Heard Sri. K. Ramakumar, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Sri. T.K. Ananthakrishnan, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and also Sri. K.P. Sudheer, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Cochin Devaswom Board. 4. The sum and substance of the case projected by the petitioner is that the festival Arattupuzha Pooram is being conducted every year, including the fire works display as part of it, to please the deity, in accordance with all the relevant rules, norms and regulations, without giving any room for complaint/objections from any corner. It is pointed out that, the very same Samithy is actively taking part of the temple festival for the past several decades and no untoward incident or any adverse circumstance has occurred in any of the previous years in connection with the fire works display. All arrangements have been made in conformity with the statutory requirements and in tune with the directions issued by the competent authorities. It is also pointed out that, the fire works display is proposed to be conducted in a vast extent of 1.10 Acres of Padasekharam, which actually belongs to the Local Authority and there is no building or dwelling place anywhere near the locality. 5. Pursuant to Exhibit-P4 application preferred by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent, the matter was caused to be enquired by the Tahasildar. After conducting a site inspection, the village officer has prepared a detailed mahazar, describing the lie and location of the property, the available infrastructure and such other relevant aspects and a report bearing No. 38/17 dated 06.03.2017 (Ext.P1) has been submitted before the Tahasildar. After conducting a site inspection, the village officer has prepared a detailed mahazar, describing the lie and location of the property, the available infrastructure and such other relevant aspects and a report bearing No. 38/17 dated 06.03.2017 (Ext.P1) has been submitted before the Tahasildar. As per the said report, it is stated that the festival is being conducted with the fire works display as part of the rituals and no instance of any casualty has been reported so far, because of the prudent precautionary steps taken in this regard. It is stated that the fire works display is sought to be conducted in the property having a vast extent, belonging to the Local Authority. The 'fire works' are intended to be stored in a temporary shed constructed in a different property comprised in re-survey No. 372/3 of the very same village and that necessary sanction has been obtained from the owner of the said property. The Police as well as the Fire & Rescue Department have been alerted and a 'supervising committee' has been constituted consisting of 36 members to conduct the festival in the most desired manner, without compromising any of the legal requirements. It is, accordingly reported by the Village Officer, that sanction could be granted for the fire works display for the current year as well. 6. On receiving the report dated 6.3.2017 of the Village Officer, some clarification was sought for by the Tahasildar, pursuant to which, it was made clear by the Village Officer as per the communication dated 21.3.2017, also forwarding a copy of the certificate issued by the Local Authority, as to the ownership of the land in question. Despite the steps taken by the petitioner and satisfying the requirement in all respects, the matter is still pending in the cold storage and hence Ext.P5 reminder was sent to the 1st respondent/District Collector, as evident from the receipt issued in this regard. Even as on 07.03.2017, the Government had alerted the District Collector and the District Police Chief, vide Ext.P6, to do all the needful for proper conduct of the festival and to report; but no action has been taken so far to grant sanction. Hence the writ petition. 7. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court, that the Apex Court had occasion to deal with the situation in connection with the Thrissur Pooram. Hence the writ petition. 7. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court, that the Apex Court had occasion to deal with the situation in connection with the Thrissur Pooram. Ext.P2 order was passed therein on 26.03.2007, relaxing the standards to the requisite extent in connection with the fire works display as part of temple festival. Reference was also made to the verdict passed by the Apex Court on an earlier occasion i.e. Noise Pollution (V) in RE, Forum, Prevention of Environmental & Sound Pollution vs. Union of India & Another, 2005 (5) SCC 733 . It is pointed out that, under similar circumstance, permission has been granted by this Court as well, as evidenced from Ext.P3, for carrying out the fire works display, subject to appropriate conditions. 8. The learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner has mentioned some prohibited items as part of the fire works display in Ext.P4 application. It is pointed out that the items like "Kuzhiminnal" and "Dynamite" are prohibited items and hence no permission can be granted to have such item. 9. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has already assured and undertaken that no prohibited items will be used in the fire works display and that clearance need not be given in respect of such items. It is also pointed out that the entire event has been caused to be insured at two different levels, having taking insurance for a total sum of Rs. 2 Crores, over and above which, the Cochin Devaswom Board has provided insurance coverage to an extent of Rs. 10 Crores, in case of any eventuality. The factual aspect in this regard is asserted by the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devasom Board as well. 10. After hearing both the sides, we find that the competent authority could be directed to issue necessary clearance for display of the fire works in connection with the "Arrattupuzha Pooram" festival, based on Ext.P4 application, except the prohibited items as mentioned above and of course subject to the riders stipulated by the Apex Court. It is open for the competent authority to incorporate appropriate conditions to safeguard the interest of all concerned and to enable the display to be conducted with adequate precautions. It is ordered accordingly. 11. It is open for the competent authority to incorporate appropriate conditions to safeguard the interest of all concerned and to enable the display to be conducted with adequate precautions. It is ordered accordingly. 11. It shall be ensured by the respondents that safe distance be maintained between the place of fire works display and the line upto which the general public can be permitted to have access and witness the event. Sufficient barricades shall be provided ensuring the safety and security. The place where the fire works are to be stored and the place of display shall be inspected by the police, Revenue and Fire & Rescue authorities under close surveillance. Proof of having taken insurance coverage as mentioned above shall be produced by the petitioner before the competent authority, before granting permission. It is open for the authorities to ensure satisfaction of all the relevant norms/conditions stipulated in the 'sanction' to be given by the competent authority. It shall also be ensured by the authorities concerned, as to the course to be pursued at time of fire works display, if at all any electricity line is existing passing through the vicinity, with the support to be obtained from the authorities of the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.