Allowed

Sarasan K.S. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jun 2018WP(C)/14060/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking permission to remove earth from his property to convert it into paddy land. The Court held that since the requisite NOC and Environmental Clearance were obtained and the land was excluded from the data bank by a government report, the petitioner could proceed with excavation.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed to proceed with removal of earth; police protection granted in case of obstruction.

Sarasan K.S. Vs the State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1940

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

SARASAN K.S.

¶9

AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE SANKARAN, POOYAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHENGANNOOR, ALAPPUZHA - 689 121.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.T.RAJESH

¶11

SMT.P.V.SARITHA VENUGOPAL

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

¶15

CHENGANNOOR, CHENGANNOOR - 689 121.

¶16

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶17

BUHANOOR, CHENGANNOOR - 688 020.

¶18

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶19

MANNAR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 012.

¶20

G. RAMAKRISHNAN,AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDAN,KATTIL HOUSE,

¶21

BUDHANOOR P.O, PERINGADU, CHENGANOOR - 688 020.

¶22

V.K THANKACHAN S/O. KUTTAPPAN, VELUTHEDATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, BUDHANOOR EAST - 688 020.

¶23

Addl.7. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER

¶24

KRISHIBHAVAN, BUDHANOR-689122.

¶25

Addl.8. LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE KRISHIBHAVAN, BUDHANOR, BUDHANOR-689122.

¶26

(ADDL.R7 AND R8 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 07.06.2018 IN I.A NO.9341/2018)

¶27

R1-R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P P THAJUDDIN R5,R6 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX R5,R6 BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

WP(C).No. 14060 of 2018 (F)

¶30

APPENDIX

¶31

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶32

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS C 254988/16 DATED 15/2/2017.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER 4943/2016 DATED 23/3/2018 OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 11420 OF 2017 DATED 10/4/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE PANCHAYATH LICENSE ISSUED TO PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 16/4/2018.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENTS OFFICE.
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 23.08.2017
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY FIELD REPORT IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS THE ADDITIONAL TAHASILDAR ISSUING EXT P9
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 25.07.2017 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA 4915 IN WPC 32141/14
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL 559/2515/DATED 26.06.2015
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DT 01.04.2014

¶33

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:

¶34

EXT.R6(a):	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT 02.05.2018 ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, BUDHANOOR
EXT.R6(b):	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT 10.12.2014 IN WPC 32141/2014
EXT.R6(c):	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 05.05.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE
	6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

jma

K. VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ

¶39

¶40

W.P(C) No.14060 of 2018 F

¶41

¶42

Dated this the 20^th day of June, 2018

¶43

J U D G M E N T

¶44

Vinod Chandran, J

¶45

The petitioner was before this Court earlier seeking

¶46

removal of earth (sic. dirt) from the property of the petitioner so

¶47

as to obtain raw materials for his own brick manufacturing unit.

¶48

The petitioner also intends to convert the property from which excavation is proposed into a paddy land after removal of the

¶49

earth. This Court by judgment dated 10.12.2014 in W.P(C) No. 32141/2014 directed that permission may be granted if the land

¶50

is not comprised of brick clay. This would run contrary to the submission of the petitioner that he needed the removal of earth

¶51

for manufacture of bricks. The petitioner then filed an

¶52

::2::

¶53

W.P(C) No.14060/2018

¶54

interlocutory application seeking to remove the brick clay. There

¶55

was a further direction issued that if no permission is required

¶56

for removal of brick clay, the same shall be allowed.

¶57

The petitioner approached the Geologist for

¶58

removal of earth,which was refused, against which an appeal was filed by the petitioner. In appeal, Ext.P13 order directed the petitioner to approach the District Collector for a No Objection Certificate and the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority for an Environmental Clearance. Ext.P1 is the NOC issued by the District Collector and Ext.P2 is the Environmental Clearance Certificate issued by the District Environment Impact Assessment Authority. Ext.P2 was the order passed renewing the certificate earlier issued up to 22.07.2018. However, on obstruction caused by the respondents 5 and 6, the petitioner was before this Court with the above writ petition.

¶59

W.P(C) No.14060/2018

¶60

::3::

¶61

On direction issued from this Court, the

¶62

Agricultural officer and the Local Level Monitoring Committee

¶63

were impleaded. Respondents 5 and 6 submitted that the property is included in the data bank. We directed the Agricultural Officer to file a report after inspection. The report dated 07.06.2018 is placed before this Court along with a memo dated 13.06.2018. The report reads as under:

¶64

“Re.Sy.No.135/20-1 and 135/20-2 is now seen as a elevated dry land plain in the fellow rice field. The land consists of 4 nos. of 15 years old Kudampuli, 1

¶65

Anjili etc. There is existing an impression of an old Anjili tree which was cut from the area. There is no

¶66

rice crop cultivation in the above said area and leveling works is not harmful to the current rice crop in Padanilam Padasekharam. The levelling

¶67

W.P(C) No.14060/2018

¶68

::4::

¶69

works in the area is not harmful to the environment

¶70

and there is no impact to the water flows of the Padasekharam.”

¶71

In the above circumstance, what remains for the

¶72

petitioner is to seek for the removal of the land from the Data Bank which the petitioner submits has already been done. In such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to proceed with the removal of earth as permitted in Exts.P1 and P2. If any obstruction is caused to the petitioner, necessarily there shall be a police protection given to the petitioner.

¶73

Writ petition is allowed. No costs.

¶74

Sd/K. Vinod Chandran, Judge

¶75

Sd/Ashok Menon, Judge

¶76

jma

Sarasan K.S. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarasan K.S. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Central Excise&Custo Vs M/S.Oen India Ltd.

State of Kerala Vs M/S Parisons Foods (P) Ltd.

Tijomon.v.a Vs the District Police Chief

E.K.Subair Vs State of Kerala

Ibrahimkutty Vs the State of Kerala

Hotel Dona Castle Vs the Excise Commissioner