Disposed

N.a.Salim v. the District Geologist

Kerala HC26 Jul 2018WP(C)/6083/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted a direction to the District Geologist to finalize the petitioner's application for the return of a bank guarantee at the earliest and within two months, allowing inspection of the site to assess damage to agricultural land resulting from sand removal with permit.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to finalize the petitioner's application for return of bank guarantee within two months and inspect the site.

N.a.Salim Vs the District Geologist — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 4TH SRAVANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 6083 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER(S)

¶7

N.A.SALIM S/O. ABOOBAKER, AGED 47 YEARS, NELLIKKUNNUMMAL HOUSE, MEENANGADI P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI.M.C.JOHN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINING & GEOLOGY, MEENANGADI, WAYANAD DISTRICT, 673 591.

¶11

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER

¶12

THRIKKEPAATTA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD 673 591.

¶13

3. THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER

¶14

KRISHI BHAVAN, MEPADI, WAYANAD 673 590.

¶15

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MANURAJ K.J.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 6083 of 2018 (I)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE NOC DATED 28.10.13 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 6.11.13 ISSUED BY IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE BANK GUARANTEE DATED 4.11.13 FURNISHED BY PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 23.6.14 FROM THE TAHSILDAR, VYTHIRI. EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 12.4.14 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.11.17 FROM THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶21

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

\ TRUE COPY \

PA TO JUDGE

jm/

SHAJI P.CHALY, J.

¶26

========================

¶27

W.P.(C) No.6083 of 2018

¶28

======================== Dated this the 26^th day of July 2018

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

On the strength of Ext.P1 NOC and Ext.P2 building permit, petitioner removed the sand from 0.0405 hectors of paddy field and made it fit for paddy cultivation. Towards security of any probable damages to the environment, a bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.2 lakhs was furnished by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the entire work was over by the year 2014, and the paddy field is being cultivated with paddy thereafter. There was no complaint/report adverse to the petitioner. On the other hand, Ext.P4 is the report of the Tahsildar stating that the mining done in 0.0405 hectors has not caused any environmental issues and permission can be given for mining karamanal from the remaining extent of land. According to the petitioner, further mining was not

¶31

W.P.(C) No.6083 of 2018

¶32

¶33

necessitated since the remaining area was not seriously affected and permission from the Environmental Impact Authority was also made mandatory. Thereupon, petitioner

¶34

has submitted Ext.P5 application before the 1^st respondent requesting to return the bank guarantee provided by the petitioner in the specified circumstances above. Even though certain steps were taken by the 1^st respondent on account of the application submitted by the petitioner, proceedings has not yet been finalised, which is causing serious prejudice to the petitioner and thus seeks appropriate directions.

¶35

Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perusing the pleadings and documents on record, there will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to attain finality to Ext.P5 application submitted by the petitioner, also receiving any report from the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents, at the earliest and at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 1^st respondent will be at liberty to inspect the site and assess the situation in order to

¶36

W.P.(C) No.6083 of 2018

¶37

¶38

consider the reliefs sought for by the petitioner in Ext.P5.

¶39

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶40

Sd/ SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE

¶41

jm/

¶42

\True copy \ PA to Judge

N.a.Salim v. the District Geologist

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.a.Salim v. the District Geologist

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

Paulose Abraham Vs Smt.a Shinamol I.A.S

Er.E.v.Mytheen Vs Pugazhendi

P.Raveendran Pillai Vs v.Saji

G. Sivarajan Vs State of Kerala

Mashood.K Vs K.B. Jayakumar

A. Vijayakumaran Vs Sunilkumar a.