Allowed

Upputhara Grama Panchayath v. the District Collector, Idukki.

Kerala HC9 Apr 2007WP(C)/9480/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed by a Grama Panchayat seeking permission to auction sand removal rights. The court directed the petitioner to conduct the auction while ensuring simultaneous action against the neighboring Panchayat to prevent discrimination, subject to the Forest Department's supervisory powers.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to conduct public auction in accordance with specific exhibits for removal of sand from Ambalamkadavu, subject to Forest Department powers and simultaneous action against the neig

Upputhara Grama Panchayath Vs the District Collector, Idukki. — Kerala HC (2007) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2007 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1929

¶5

WP(C).No. 9480 of 2007(C)

PETITIONER:

UPPUTHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, UPPUTHARA PO, IDUKKI- 685 505, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU

¶11

SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

¶14

1.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI.

¶15

2.THE TAHSILDAR, PEERUMADU.

¶16

3.THE GEOLOGIST, IDUKKI DISTRICT, THODUPUZHA.

¶17

4.THE ASSISTANT WILD LIFE WARDEN, IDUKKI, WILD LIFE SANCTUARY, IDUKKI.

¶18

BY ADV. SRI.RANJITH THAMPAN,SPL.G.P.,FORESTS

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.

¶21

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.9480 of 2007

¶22

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 9^th April, 2007

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Mr.Renjith Thampan, Special Government Pleader (Forests) concedes that auction was permitted by the District Collector to be conducted in respect of the Kadavus within the limits of the Kanchiyar Panchayat. In view of the obvious position that the petitionerPanchayat and the Kanchiyar Panchayat are on the opposite sides of the same river, I do not find any reason for the discrimination. Mr.Thampan further submits that the stand of the Forest Department is consistent, that mining of sand from the Kadavus within the petitioner Panchayat and the Kanchiyar Panchayat comes within the Full Reserve Level (FRL) as evident from Ext.R4(a). I notice that notice similar to Ext.R4(c) was issued in respect of Kanchiyar Panchayat also. If at all auction was conducted, the same is in violation of Ext.R4(c) and the Kanchiyar Panchayat and the persons will be liable for proceeded against, so submits Mr.Thampan. Under these circumstances, I dispose of the Writ Petition issuing the following directions:

¶25

The petitioner-Panchayat is permitted to conduct public auction in accordance with Exts.P1 and P5 for removal of sand from Ambalamkadavu. However, it is made clear that such auction and

¶26

W.P.C.No.9480/07 - 2 -

¶27

removal of sand by the Panchayat will be without prejudice to the powers of the Forest Department to take action. But the action, if at all will be taken simultaneously against the petitioner-Panchayat and the Kanchiyar Panchayat.

¶28

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶29

srd

Upputhara Grama Panchayath v. the District Collector, Idukki.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upputhara Grama Panchayath v. the District Collector, Idukki.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.v.Davis @ Thavu Vs the Gramapanchayath, Kadangod.

D.Raj Kumar Vs Secretary, Corporation of Kollam

Baby K.N. Vs Irinjhalakuda Municipality

P.Sankara Warrier Vs State of Kerala

V.V. Shaji Vs Thiruvalla Municipality

Pearl Spot Resort Ltd. Vs the Secretary