Disposed

Ambujakshan v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Nov 2014WP(C)/28246/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed by a petitioner alleging non-consideration of his application for renewal of quarrying permission. The Court held that the question of renewal requires adjudication by the Tahsildar considering objections and hearing parties. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Tahsildar to pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; Tahsildar directed to pass appropriate orders on the renewal application after hearing within six weeks.

Ambujakshan Vs the State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/20TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 28246 of 2014 (E)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

AMBUJAKSHAN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.JANARDHANAN, PROPRIETOR, THAMPAN GRANITES ANAKKOTTOOR, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.D.AJITH KUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIORNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 001.

¶12

3. TAHSILDAR, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM - 691 003.

¶13

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE,KOLLAM 691 007.

¶14

5. GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, ASRAMAM P.O, KOLLAM - 691 002.

¶15

6. L.VIVEKANANDAN, KAILASAMANGALAM, VENDAR P.O,

¶16

NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM - 691 003.

¶17

R6 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SREE VINAYAKAN R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED SHAFI M

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C).No. 28246 of 2014 (E)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶22

EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19-04-2014 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

¶23

EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE FOR QUARRYING FROM THE SECRETARY, NEDUVATHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,KOLLAM ISSUED TO PETITIONER DATED 24.4.2014

¶24

EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 28-07-2008 FOR POSSESSION FOR USE OF EXPLOSIVES FROM JOINT CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES.

¶25

EXHIBIT P3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPENTENCY DATED 1-122010 ISSUED BY DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES.

¶26

EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE INTEGRATED CONSENT TO OPERATE- RENEWAL FOR ROCK QUARRYING @ 8 LOAD/DAY TILL 05-12-2014 ISSUED BY POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.

¶27

EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO 07/14/EVT DATED 3-5-2014.

¶28

EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER VIDE NO 3299/A3/13/ENVT.DATED 19-072014 ISSUED BY FIRST RESPONDENT TO ALL DISTRICT COLLECTORS

¶29

EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S NO 296 OF 2011 DATED 21-12014 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,KOTTARAKKARA.

¶30

EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN A.S NO 81 OF 2014.

¶31

EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28-06-2013 OF THE RESPONDENT NO.3.

¶32

EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE NATURE AND LIE OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE QUARRYING IS DONE BOTH BY THE PETITIONER AND THE FOURTH RESPONDENT IN THE BENAMI NAME.

¶33

EXHIBIT P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 24-04-2014 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO.3.

¶34

EXHIBIT P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT WPC NO. 21202 OF 2014 DATED 22-09-2014.

¶35

EXHIBIT P13 : TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT FOR QUARRYING DATED 13-05-2014 WHICH IS GIVEN TO MR. SURESH.

¶36

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶41

¶42

W.P.(C).No. 28246 OF 2014

¶43

¶44

Dated this the 11^th day of November, 2014

¶45

JUDGMENT

¶46

The petitioner was granted a permission for quarrying by the 3^rd respondent, which is produced as Ext.P1. The land, in which quarrying operations are being conducted, is admittedly the Government puramboke land. The petitioner preferred Ext.P11 before the 3^rd respondent-Tahsildar for renewal of Ext.P1. It is on account of non consideration of Ext.11, the petitioner has approached this Court. In this matter, the 6^th respondent, neighbouring owner of the area where the quarrying operations are being conducted, filed O.S. No.296/2011 and that an order of injunction has been granted by the Civil Court against the operation of quarry in the B schedule property in the suit.

¶47

The question, whether the petitioner is entitled for renewal or not, is a matter to be decided by the Tahsildar after adverting to relevant objections of the 6^th respondent and other relevant materials and also after hearing the petitioner. The

¶48

W.P.(C) No.28246/2014

¶49

¶50

Tahsildar shall pass appropriate orders on Ext.P11, after hearing

¶51

the parties, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt

¶52

of a copy of this judgment.

¶53

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, Judge.

¶56

Dpk

¶57

/true copy/ PS to Judge.

Ambujakshan v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambujakshan v. the State of Kerala

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

V.K.Sukumaran Vs Union of India

Paulose Vs the Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Cherian Varghese Vs State of Kerala

M/S.N.J.Thomas and Co. Vs Union of India

Suryakant Purushotham Vs the Registrar

Abdulla E Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.