M/S.K.V.Blue Metals vs. State Of Kerala - Kerala High Court, 09 October 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNE AY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 17TH ASWINA, 1941 WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER: M/S.K.V.BLUE METALS, T.C.36/999, PERUMTHANNI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER R.J,KARUNANIDHI, S/O.JAYARAMAN ACHARI, AGED 67 YEARS, T.C.36/999, SREESANTH, T.R.SUKUMARAN NAIR ROAD, PERUMTHANNI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 008. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2 THE DIRECTOR, MINING AND GEOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KODAPPANAKKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 043. 4 THE KARAVARAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KARAVARAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 605, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5 THE TAHASILDAR(LR), CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK, CHIRAYINKEEZHU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 304. 6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARAVARAM VILLAGE, KARAVARAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 605. 7 THE GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, KODAPPANKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 043. WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 2 8 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 9 THE TALUK SURVEYOR, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK, CHIRAYINKEEZHU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 304. SRI.N.B.SUNILNATH -G.P, SRI.T.NAVEEN -S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 3 JUDGMENT

The petitioner, which is stated to be a partnership firm, claims that they have already obtained a quarrying lease, namely Ext.P2, from the Director of Mining and Geology and that they are now operating a stone quarry on the strength of Exts.P1, P3 to P6 consents, including from the Pollution Control Board and the Trade Licence issued by the Grama Panchayat. They say that, however, they have now been issued with Ext.P7 stop memo by the fourth respondent - Grama Panchayat asking them to cease all activities until further orders so as to enable them to measure and demarcate a public road by name Nedumparambu - Neduvanmala - Kunjakkavila Road which is allegedly included in their Asset Register. The petitioner says that road in question is a private road used not only by him but by various other quarries and that it is not included in the Asset Register of the Panchayat. They, therefore, say that Ext.P7 is untenable and consequently, that it be set aside.

Sri.T.Naveen, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Pollution Control Board submits that Ext.P3 consent to operate has been issued and that if there is any violation by the petitioner of the terms contained therein, then all necessary action will be taken by them even without waiting for orders

WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 4 from this Court. He says that no such violations have been yet brought to the notice of the Board and therefore, that no further orders be issued in this case against them.

Sri.Sunilnath, the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents, submits that as is clear from Ext.P7, it is not intended to be a complete stop of all the operations of the petitioner forever, but that on account of certain disputes with respect to the aforementioned road, the District Collector thought it fit that the same be measured and demarcated. He says that it is only to ensure that such an action is done properly that Ext.P7 has been issued as a temporary measure.

In response, Sri.Mohanlal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, reiteratingly asserts that the road in question is not included in the Asset Register of the Panchayat and therefore, that Ext.P7 could not have been issued. He says that by issuing Ext.P7 in the present manner and that too without affording any opportunity of being heard to his client, their lawful activities are being now sought to be stopped, particularly when they are acting under valid consents and permissions.

WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 5

Even though notice from this Court has been served on the Grama Panchayat, they have chosen neither to be present before this Court nor to be represented through counsel; inferentially guiding me to the impression that they have nothing to offer in answer to the various allegations in this writ petition.

When I consider the afore submissions and examine the pleadings and materials available, it is prima facie without doubt that the petitioner appears to be acting on the strength of all valid and necessary licences. Even in Ext.P7, there is not even a whisper that they are violating any of such consents and permissions, except that they have been asked to stop activities so as to measure and demarcate the road in question. However, this order has been issued as early as on 07.08.2019 and more than 1½ months have now elapsed; but there is nothing on record to show what action has been taken thereafter and the Panchayat has chosen not to answer any of these allegations.

I am, therefore, of the view, particularly taking note of the submissions of Sri.Mohan Lal, that the road in question is not included in the Asset Register of the Panchayat, the

WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 6 petitioner cannot be shut down in the manner as has been ordered in Ext.P7 ad infinitum. I am of the firm opinion that necessary action pursuant thereto must be competed within the shortest period of time. Resultantly, I order this writ petition and grant liberty to the Panchayat as well as to the official respondents to complete the measurement of the road as suggested in Ext.P7 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and if this is not done, then the said order will become inoperative on the expiry of this term. I also leave full liberty to the District Collector as well as to the Panchayat to take all necessary action against the petitioner, if so warranted, if they are found violating any of the conditions of the licences and consents given to them but since this is not an issue directly arising in this writ petition, I do not deem it necessary to issue any further directions in this regard. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN stu JUDGE

WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 7 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 THEOF THE QUARRYING LEASE NO.788/2010-11/1196/M3/2011 DATED 22.02.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 THEOF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 03.03.2011 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P3 THEOF THE CONSENT NO.PCB/TVM- DO/ICO/QRY/408/2018 DATED 04.09.2018 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXHIBIT P3 A THEOF THE GST REGISTRATION NO.32AALFK6982GIZI DATED 21.09.2017 ISSUED BY THE TAXING OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 THEOF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENSE NO.E/SC/KL/22/1520(E70168) DATED 29.03.2017 AND THE MAGAZINE ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P5 THEOF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE NO.06/2018 DATED 05.01.2018 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY, KERALA. EXHIBIT P6 THEOF THE LICENSE NO.1/2019- 2020/A3/903/19 DATED 10.04.2019 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT P7 THEOF STOP MEMO NO.A3-2798/19 DATED 07.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8 THEOF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE ASSET REGISTER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYATH AND THE GOOGLE MAP. EXHIBIT P9 THEOF THE COMMISSION REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN OS NO.58/2018 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL.

WP(C).No.23718 OF 2019(L) 8 EXHIBIT P10 THEOF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.08.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 AND ITS RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4. EXHIBIT P11 THEOF THE MINUTES AND THE DECISION OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29/08/2019. EXHIBIT P12 THEOF THE ORDER NO: B7-210611/19 DATED 31/08/2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //// P.A TO JUDGE.