Disposed

Mohanakrishnan v. the District Collector

Kerala HC5 Nov 2013WP(C)/27106/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment addresses a stalemate where the District Collector and District Geologist held divergent views on the delegation of powers to grant NOCs for minor minerals. The court directed the Collector to decide the applications without ruling on the delegation issue.

What did the court decide?

District Collectors directed to consider applications for NOC and pass orders within four weeks of receipt.

Mohanakrishnan Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/14TH KARTHIKA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 27106 of 2013 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER:-

¶7

MOHANAKRISHNAN ,AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.RAMAKRISHNA MENON, PANDARAKALATHIL, EZHAVATHURUTHY AMSOM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ SRI.T.K.BABU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:-

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM PIN - 676 505.

¶11

2. THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST

¶12

DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505.

¶13

R1 &R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.T.LILLY.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-11-2013,ALONG WITH WP(C) 27130/2013 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

¶15

KKS

¶16

WP(C).No. 27106 of 2013 (K) AND WP(C) 27130/2013

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:-

¶19

EXT.P-1: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE SAID PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VATTAMKULAM VILLAGE DATED 30.9.2013

¶20

EXT.P-2: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3959 OF 2006 OF EDAPPAL SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE DATED 30.4.1999.

¶21

EXT.P-3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.10.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

¶22

EXT.P-4: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 23.1.2013 IN WPC NO.2221 OF 2013.

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO.JUDGE

KKS

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶28

W.P.(C)No. 27106 & 27130 OF 2013 ......................................................................... Dated this the 5^th November, 2013

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioners in these cases are aggrieved of the course

¶31

and proceedings being pursued by the respondents, particularly,

¶32

in view of the divergent views and stands taken by the District Collector and the District Geologist.

¶33

The case of the petitioners is that, they are owners of different extents of lands in the concerned survey numbers situated in the concerned village covered by the relevant title deeds. The petitioners wanted to have necessary permit to be issued by the District Geologist for extracting minor minerals from the property and on approaching the said authority, the petitioners were let known that proper 'NOC' has to be procured

¶34

from the District Collector for enabling the District Geologist to issue the requisite sanction.

¶35

In the above circumstance, the petitioners approached the District Collector by filing applications as Ext. P3 in W.P.(C). Nos. 27106 of 2013 and Ext.P5. in W.P.(C).No.27130 of 2013 for granting the NOC. The petitioners were given to understand that

¶36

W.P.(C)No. 27106 & 27130 OF 2013 2

¶37

the District Collector had already delegated the power to grant NOC (depending upon the volume of the 'red earth' to be removed) to the concerned authorities as specified in the order bearing No.B11/13784/2012 dated 06/12/2012 (a copy of which is placed for perusal and which was produced as Ext.P4 also in W.P.(C).No.544/2013 , a similar matter dealt with by this Court and disposed of by judgment dated 09.01.2013). The petitioners challenge the said course of action on different grounds, mainly for the reason that, the District Collector does not have any authority to delegate the power conferred on him, being the competent authority under the statute.

¶38

The course pursued by the District Collector is not endorsed by the other authorities concerned, particularly, the Director of Mining and Geology as per letter bearing No. 10699/M3/2012 dated 13.12.2012, (a copy of which is placed for perusal and was produced as Ext.P5 also in W.P.(C). No.544/2013 (referred to above) ), whereby the concerned Geologist was let known that, by virtue of Rule 62 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967, the competent authority,

¶39

W.P.(C)No. 27106 & 27130 OF 2013 3

¶40

who happens to be the District Collector, cannot delegate the power conferred on him to other officers without the previous sanction of the State Government and without a notification in the Official Gazette, simultaneously asking the Geologist to communicate the position to the District Collector. As it stands so, a stalemate has been created, as the two different authorities, adopt two different views; as a result of which, the petitioners have been put to difficulty, driving them to this Court.

¶41

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶42

There is no dispute that the District Collector is the Competent Authority to issue 'NOC' as per the relevant Rules. Dispute is only with regard to the power to delegate. As such, the concerned District Collectors are directed to consider the applications preferred by the petitioners for granting 'NOC' and to pass orders in accordance with law, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'four weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The question, as to the power and competence of the District Collector to have delegated the power to issue 'NOC' under the KMMC Rules, is left open.

¶43

W.P.(C)No. 27106 & 27130 OF 2013

¶44

¶45

The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along

¶46

with a copy of the relevant writ petition before the concerned

¶47

District Collector for further steps.

¶48

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶49

¶50

W.P.(C)No. 27106 & 27130 OF 2013

¶51

Mohanakrishnan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohanakrishnan v. the District Collector

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

K.C.Appukunju Vs Sri.K.R.Narayanan, Tahsildar

Puliparambu Desom Chandanakudam Committee Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Joshy V.K Vs Senior Geologist

P.T.Abdussamad Vs District Collector, Malappuram

Alexander George Vs the Chief General Manager

Mohanan Vs Village Offier, Vazhakkulam Village