Partly allowed

P.Vikraman, v. the Secretary

Kerala HC24 Jul 2019WP(C)/8105/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of a closure notice, issuance of trade license, and direction to consider an appeal and revision petition. The Court directed the Secretary to Government, Forest Department, to consider the pending revision petition and interim relief within specific timelines with notice and opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Directed Secretary to Government, Forest Department to pass orders on the revision petition within three months and on interim relief within two weeks, with notice and opportunity of hearing.

P.Vikraman, Vs the Secretary — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.8105 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

P.VIKRAMAN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.PONNAN PILLAI, PROPRIETOR, KILITHATTIL WOOD INDUSTRIES, KILITHATTIL HOUSE, KALANJOOR P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-689694.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.S.ABHILASH SRI.K.SIJU

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE SECRETARY, KALANJOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KALANJOOR P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-689694.

¶11

2 THE KALANJOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KALANJOOR P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-689694 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

3 PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, KERALA FOREST DEPARTMENT, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM-691001.

¶13

4 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, FOREST DIVISION, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA-689691.

¶14

5 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST DEPARTMENT 1ST FLOOR, SOUTH BLOCK, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001

¶15

BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SMT NIMA JACOB- SPL GP(FOREST)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶20

-2-

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner, who is the proprietor of M/s.Kilithattil

¶23

Wood Industries, at Kalanjoor in Adoor Taluk, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P14 notice dated 12.03.2019 issued by the 1^st respondent, whereby the petitioner has been directed to close down the saw mill. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent to issue D&O Licence (Sic:Trade Licence) without insisting production of licence from the Forest Department, and a writ of mandamus commanding the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P10 appeal pending before the 3^rd respondent, within a time limit prescribed by this Court. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that he is entitled to function the saw mill during the pendency of Ext.P10 , without being interfered and obstructed by the respondents.

¶24

On 18.03.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court issued urgent notice on admission by special messenger to respondents 1 and 2, returnable by

¶25

-3-

¶26

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶27

25.03.2019. The learned Senior Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 3 and 4. Respondents 3 and 4 were directed to file statement/counter affidavit within two weeks.

¶28

On 25.03.2019, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions as to the present status of Ext.P10 appeal, which is pending consideration before the 3^rd respondent Chief Conservator of Forest, who is the appellate authority under sub-rule (2) of Rule 90 of the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Saw Mills and Other Wood Based Industrial Units) Rules 2012. The learned Standing Counsel for the Grama Panchayat sought time to file counter affidavit.

¶29

On 30.05.2019, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Ext.10 appeal filed by the petitioner, challenging Ext.P8 order dated 28.12.2018, ended in dismissal and the said order is under challenge in a revision petition filed before the Government. While posting the matter to 04.06.2019, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get necessary

¶30

-4-

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶32

instructions through the 4^th respondent, as to whether the petitioner is running the wood industry in question.

¶33

On 04.06.2019, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned Special Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is presently not running the wood industry in question. The learned Special Government submitted further that, a statement of the 3^rd respondent is being filed on that day. The petitioner was directed to file reply affidavit, if any, within two weeks.

¶34

By the order dated 28.06.2019, in I.A.No.1 of 2019, the Secretary to Government, Forest Department, was impleaded as additional 5^th respondent. I.A.No.2 of 2019 filed by the petitioner seeking an order to amend the writ petition, incorporating additional statement of facts, grounds and reliefs, was allowed and the petitioner has also filed an amended writ petition.

¶35

A statement of the 3^rd respondent Chief Conservator of Forest is placed on record, on 06.06.2016.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the

¶37

-5-

¶38

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶39

respondents.

¶40

Ext.P8 order, which was under challenge in Ext.P10 appeal filed by the petitioner, ended in dismissal by Ext.P16 order dated 30.03.2019 of the 3^rd respondent. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed Ext.P17 revision before the additional 5^th respondent, invoking the provisions under Rule 20 of the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Saw Mills and Other Wood Based Industrial Units) Rules 2012, which is now pending consideration before the said respondent.

¶41

The learned Government Pleader would submit that the additional 5^th respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P17 revision petition, with notice to the petitioner, and after affording him an opportunity of being heard. The learned Government Pleader would also submit that the said respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders on the interim relief sought for in Ext.P17 revision, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶42

Having considered the submissions made by the

¶43

learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of

¶44

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶45

-6-

¶46

by directing the additional 5^th respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P17 revision petition filed by the petitioner against Ext.P16 order, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The additional 5^th respondent shall also consider the interim relief sought for in Ext.P17 and pass appropriate orders, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶47

It is made clear that, this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner in Ext.P17. It is for the additional 5^th respondent to take an appropriate decision, strictly in accordance with law.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶50

das

¶51

-7-

¶52

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶53

APPENDIX

¶54

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶55

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF PERMANENT REGISTRATION ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA DATED 9/2/1993. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13/3/2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.6537/2013 DATED 28/10/2013. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR GETTING NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE FOR WOOD BASED INDUSTRIES DATED 19/12/2012.

¶56

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY THE ADDL.PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND NODAL OFFICER, FOREST HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 12/1/2016. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. KNC6-1680/13 DATED 14/3/2016. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25/11/2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶57

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.KNC6-1480/13 DATED 28/12/2018 EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE CRP NO.264/2017 EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT.

¶58

W.P.(C). No. 8105 of 2019

¶59

-8-

¶60

EXHIBIT P11	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR D AND O LICENCE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 16/2/2019
EXHIBIT P12	A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA DATED 21/1/2019.
EXHIBIT P13	A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED BY THE FACTORIES AND BOILERS DEPARTMENT DATED 30/5/2018
EXHIBIT P14	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.A9-898/19 DATED 12/3/2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P15	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.KNC6- 1480/12 DATED 15/10/2013 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P16	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.QL 703/2019 DATED 30.3.2019 IN EXT.P10 APPEAL PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P17	A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, FOREST DEPARTMENT UNDER RULE 20 OF THE KERALA FOREST (REGULATION OF SAW MILLS AND OTHER WOOD BASED INDUSTRIAL UNITS)RULES, 2012.

P.Vikraman, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Vikraman, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Philip P Mathew Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Chandran Nair Vs Akathethara Grama Panchayat

K.B.Hameed Vs State of Kerala

Minimol Thomas Vs the Thidanad Grama Panchayath

Binoy Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar.S Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram