Rajan P.K vs District Collector

C. Jayachandran, J

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order of the Additional District Magistrate, which refused the petitioner's application for issuance of LE-6 licence for public display of fire works in connection with the festival of Sree Koottala Bhagavathy Temple at Keralassery, Palakkad. Four reasons are seen cited in Ext.P5 for refusal, which are as follows:

(1) A storage room/magazine has not been provided.

(2) Risk Assessment Plan and On-Site Emergency Plan were not produced after curing the defects.

(3) Application has not been submitted two months prior to the date scheduled for public display of fire works.

(4) Scarcity of time left to sent the sample of the explosives for chemical analysis, as required in Rule 128 of the Explosives Rules.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, this Court notice that a permanent magazine is not contemplated for an LE-6 licence on the basis of an application preferred, as per AE-6. As a matter of fact, there is no serious storage of the explosives involved, since the explosives are brought to the place immediately before the display, and the same is displayed. The licence sought for usually is for a day and the instant case is specifically for a day. A similar situation has been dealt by a division bench of this Court in K.Sreenivasan v. District Collector (W.P.(C) No.5261 of 2020), wherein it was directed that, if the petitioner produces a portable magazine to the satisfaction of the authorities, the same would cater to the requirements of law, for which course the petitioner is amenable. Therefore, the first objection specified in Ext.P5 cannot be sustained.

The second objection is with respect to the Risk Assessment Plan/On-Site Emergency Plan. The learned counsel for the petitioner would invite that the attention of this Court to Ext.P3, which is named as a site plan, but contains all the necessary particulars, including the barricades and the access roads, in case an emergency evacuation is required. There is no specific finding in Ext.P5 that Ext.P3 plan is not sufficient. Now, coming to the Risk Assessment Plan, the learned counsel would submit that there are no agencies in Kerala, which are approved and competent to conduct such risk analysis study. In answer to the same, the learned Government Pleader would submit that there are a few agencies. Whatever that be, it remains a fact that there is scarcity of reputed agencies for conducting the study, wherefore, strict enforcement of the said requirement may cause practical hurdles. In such circumstances, the purpose will be served if the authorities concerned stipulates an alternate safeguard in this regard, so as to ensure the purpose of a Risk Assessment Plan. Such alternate safeguard, if any, made by the authorities will be complied with by the petitioner.

Coming to the third objection with respect to the requirement of filing an application before two months from the scheduled date, this Court notice that, as per the conditions in licence form LE-6 forming part of Rule 113 of the Explosives Rules, the requirement is only of filing an application 7 days in advance before conducting the fire works display. In the instant case, the application was preferred before one month, is the submission made. In the circumstances, the said objection is also sidelined.

The last objection is with respect to the limited time available for sending a sample of the explosives for chemical analysis. In answer to the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner intends to conduct display of Chinese crackers as could be seen from Ext.P6 bill of supply, which pertains to twenty boxes of Pomet Black Thunder (PBT). The authorities concerned will apply their mind with respect to this aspect as well and shall grant licence, as if the commodity, as reflected in Ext.P6, is Chinese crackers.

In the circumstances, the Additional District Magistrate, Palakkad is directed to issue licence in Form LE-6 to the petitioner to conduct public display of fire works on 30.06.2024, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall produce portable magazine/magazines to the satisfaction of the authorities for the storage of the fire works.

(ii) The petitioner shall satisfy all other requisite conditions for fireworks display under LE-6 licence to the satisfaction of the authorities.

(iii) Before commencement of the fireworks display, barricades shall be put up at a distance of 100 metres of the display point on all sides and no one except the persons who are performing fire works display shall be permitted into the prohibited area of 100 metres.

(iv) The quantity of the fireworks shall be limited to 15 kilograms.

(v) The police department and other statutory authorities shall supervise the entire fireworks display and issue necessary directions, if necessary.

(vi) In case of violation of any of the conditions, it will be open to the ADM or other competent officials to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.