The court rejected the petition challenging the withdrawal of consent for forest road use. It held that using forest roads for commercial quarrying activities is impermissible. The petitioner's claim to use the road post-cessation of operations is left open for future proceedings.
Challenge against the order withdrawing consent for forest road usage rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 23RD KARTHIKA, 1941
WP(C).No.5943 OF 2013(P)
PETITIONER :-
P.D.BABY, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.DEVASSY, PALATTI HOUSE, MALAYATTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 581.
BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
RESPONDENTS :-
CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.
5 CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES KENDRIYA BHAVAN, BLOCK C-2, 3RD FLOOR, CSEZ P.O., KAKKANAD - 682 037.
R1, R3, R6 & R7 BY SRI.SANDHESH RAJA. SPL. G.P. R4 BY SRI. M.AJAY, SC
R5 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.5943 OF 2013(P)
-: 2 :-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court, seeking the
following prayers:-
learned Government Pleader.
that the consent of the Kerala State Pollution Control Board for quarrying operations has been withdrawn and that the petitioner is no longer operating the quarry in the premises. It is contended that in the above circumstances, the rejection of the request made by
WP(C).No.5943 OF 2013(P)
-: 3 :-
the petitioner for use of the forest road by Ext.P9, no longer applies to the facts and circumstances of the case. It is stated that the objection of the respondents with regard to the use of the road by the petitioner was that the quarrying operations and the transportation of quarry rocks from the petitioner's premises was causing degradation to the forest since, the access road was completely through the forest area. It is therefore, submitted that the objections raised in Ext.P9 are no longer relevant since, the petitioner is not using the property for quarrying operations.
WP(C).No.5943 OF 2013(P)
-: 4 :-
road cannot be used for such commercial purposes. The question whether the petitioner can use the forest road for ingress and egress to his property otherwise than for transporting of materials to and from the quarry does not arise for consideration in this Writ Petition.
In the above view of the matter, the challenge raised against Ext.P9 is devoid of merits and the said prayer is not liable to be granted. The contention of the petitioner with regard to the user of the road, once the quarry ceases to operate, is left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE
Jvt/15.11.2019
WP(C).No.5943 OF 2013(P)
-: 5 :-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES :- NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a challenge to the withdrawal of consent for forest road usage for quarrying is maintainable when the petitioner admits quarrying has ceased.
Whether a forest road can be used for commercial purposes without Central Government permission.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to use the forest road for general ingress and egress after cessation of quarrying operations.
P.D.Baby
District Collector, Kakkanad
Malayattoor Neeleswaram Grama Panchayath
Senior Geologist, Department of Mining & Geology
Kerala State Pollution Control Board
Controller of Explosives
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
