Dismissed

C.Rafeek v. the Port Conservator

Kerala HC3 Oct 2011WP(C)/25659/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought writ mandamus to permit transport of Ponnani port sand outside Malappuram District. The court, relying on a common judgment, permitted respondents to issue passes allowing sand transport to places outside the district and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was disposed of, permitting the respondents to issue passes for transporting port sand to places outside the Malappuram District.

C.Rafeek Vs the Port Conservator — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 25659 of 2011(F)

¶6

--------------------------

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

¶9

C.RAFEEK,S/O.SIDDIK,AGED 38 YEARS,

¶10

11/213,CHANDAKKARANTE HOUSE,PONNANI,

¶11

MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

(R.C OWNER OF KL.17.B.4978 (GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶13

P.BABU,S/O.HASSAN,MARAPINTE HOUSE, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

(R.C OWNER OF KL.10.X.6008 GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶15

M.SHAMSU,S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY, MARAPINTE HOUSE,PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (R.C OWNER OF KL.13.P.9976)

¶16

ASHOKAN,S/O.KRISHNAN, MARAKKATT HOUSE,PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (R.C OWNER OF KL.8Y.5853 (GOODS CARRIAGE)

¶17

SARU,D/O.ABDU,KATHALIYA VEETTIL, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶18

(R.C OWNER OF KL.55.1430 GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶19

SIDDIK,S/O.IBRAHIM,CHEMBAYIL HOUSE, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶20

(R.C OWNER OF KL.10.H.8595 (GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶21

MOHAMMED ILYAS, S/O.SAINUDDEEN, ILLIKKAL HOUSE, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (R.C OWNER OF KL.7.AC. 1042,(GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶22

ABOOBACKER, S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY, MARAKKATH HOUSE, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (R.C OWNER OF KL.7.X.8296 (GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶23

SHIHAB,S/O.ASHRAF, VALAPPILAKATH HOUSE, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶24

(R.C OWNER OF KL.08.AC.3355, GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶25

ABOOBACKER, S/O.IMBACHI, KAMMALIKKANAKATH HOUSE,PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶26

(R.C OWNER OF KL.5.M.2676 (GOODS CARRIAGE).

¶27

W.P.(C) NO. 25659 OF 2011

¶28

:2:

¶29

FAROOK,S/O.IBRAHIM,PALLITHAZHATH HOUSE, PONNANI,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (R.C OWNER OF KL.33.2154.

¶30

BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF

¶31

RESPONDENTS:

¶32

¶33

THE PORT CONSERVATOR, OFFICE OF PORT CONSERVATOR, PORT AND SHIPPING,PONNANI HARBOUR,

¶34

PONNANI P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 679 583.

¶35

PONNANI MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PONNANI MUNICIPALITY,PONNANI P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 679 583.

¶36

DIRECTOR GENERAL POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶37

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (P) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶38

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P. N. SANTHOSH

¶39

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶40

W.P.(c) No. 25659 of 2011

¶41

APPENDIX

¶42

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS

¶43

EXHIBIT P1A. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1B. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1C. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1D. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1E. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1F. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1G. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1H. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1I. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1J. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P1K. TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE.

¶44

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE PORT SAND PERMIT ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 24.09.2011.

¶45

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE CASH BILL FOR THE PORT SAND PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24.09.2011.

¶46

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE G.O DATED 11.11.2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN NO. 58289/P3/2010/REVENUE.

¶47

EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.30683/2010 DATED 8.8.2011 OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶48

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶49

/TRUE COPY/

¶50

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶51

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶52

¶53

W.P (C) No . 25659 of 2011

¶54

¶55

Dated, this the 3^rd October, 2011

¶56

JUDGMENT

¶57

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶58

prayers :

¶59

I. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permits the petitioner and their vehicles bearing Reg. Nos. KL 17B 4978, KL 10X 6008, KL13 P 9976. KL8Y 5853, KL55 1430, KL 10 H 8595, KL 7 AC 1042, KL 7X 8296, KL 10 AC 3355, KL 5H 2676 and KL 33 2154 to transport the port sand from Malappuram District to other districts as per the choice of the consumers/customers in view of Exhibit P4, P5 and Judgments in W.P.(C) No. 23818/11, 23810/11 and 25187/2011.

¶60

II. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents issue passes to the petitioners deleting the condition imposed in the port sand pass/permit restricting the transportation of the Port sand only in Malappuram District (valid only in Malappuram District) and direct them to issue permit to the areas outside Malappuram District.

¶61

III. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent and his subordinates officers not in interfere or seize the petitioners vehicles while transporting the port sand outside Malappuram District on the basis of the permit issued by the respondents 1 and 2.

¶62

W.P. (C) No. 25659 of 2011

¶63

: 2 :

¶64

IV. Issue such other reliefs this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶65

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶66

issue involved in this Court is squarely covered by the common judgment dated 20^th September, 2011 in W.P.(C) Nos. 23810 and 23818 of 2011.

¶67

The relevant portion of the said judgment (paragraph 2) reads as follows :

¶68

“2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent Municipality submits that, in the Writ Petition resulting in Ext. P7 judgment, there was a direction issued by this Court to the effect that the sand from the Ponnani Port should be transported only within the Malappuram District and that it was therefore that such a condition was insisted. It is stated that when the writ petition was disposed of by Ext. P7 judgment, such a condition has not been retained. On this ground, the Municipality that it is now free to issue passes enabling transportation of the sand from the Ponnani Port to places outside Malappuram District”.

¶69

Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent Municipality and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the other respondents.

¶70

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to take a different turn. The concerned respondents are free to issue passes in respect of the subject matter involved

¶71

W.P. (C) No. 25659 of 2011

¶72

: 3 :

¶73

herein, enabling transportation of sand from the Port at Ponnani to places outside Malappuram District as well.

¶74

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶75

Sd/

¶76

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶77

kmd

C.Rafeek v. the Port Conservator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Rafeek v. the Port Conservator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suseela Vs Dist.Medical Officer. Kozhikode

State of Kerala Vs Eldhose

Ravi Sankar Vs Mr K.v.Shenoy

Kerala State Electricity Board and Anoth Vs Sajan P.K.

Hashir Abdulla Vs University of Calicut and Others

Zacharia Saji Vs Mahatma Gandhi University