Disposed

Thomas Sebastian v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Dec 2020WP(C)/25577/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought extension or renewal of an expired quarrying lease to cover a period lost due to administrative orders. The court held that without statutory or contractual grounds for extension, relief was unavailable, but ordered the respondent authority to consider the renewal application within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner relief for extension denied; respondent directed to consider renewal application within one month.

Thomas Sebastian Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.25577 OF 2020(V)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THOMAS SEBASTIAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.P.V. DEVASSYKUTTY, PARAPPILLY HOUSE, PULINGAL, VELLAMUNDA P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.ARUN THOMAS SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL SMT.DIVYA SARA GEORGE

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001.

¶11

2 THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTAM PALACE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 004.

¶12

3 TEH GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, MEENANGADY., WAYANAD – 673 591.

¶13

S KANNAN SR GP

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.25577 OF 2020(V)

¶16

..2..

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 21st day of December 2020

¶19

The petitioner is having a quarrying lease. According to

¶20

him, he could not conduct quarrying operation from 27.04.2016

¶21

till 13.11.2020. The lease period had expired on 13.11.2020.

¶22

The petitioner seeks a direction for the extension of the period of quarrying lease by taking into account the period he had lost on account of the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate. The petitioner also seeks a direction alternatively for the renewal of the quarrying lease.

¶23

The Apex Court in Dharmendra Kumar Singh v.

¶24

State of Utharpradesh [2020 (5) KLT Online 1118 (SC)] held that the extension of the quarrying lease will depend upon the terms of lease or referable to the statutory provision. The learned Special Government Pleader also placed reliance on

¶25

WP(C).No.25577 OF 2020(V)

¶26

..3..

¶27

W.A. No. 1478/2020 and submits that this cannot be considered even in the light of the Division Bench Judgment. The

¶28

petitioner disputed the applicability of the judgment. Anyway, I am of the view that in the absence of statutory provisions or contractual terms, the petitioner cannot seek extension of quarrying lease to recoup the lost period. However, nothing prevents the 2^nd respondent from considering the application for renewal of licence, if such application is filed in accordance with law. Needful shall be done for considering the application for renewal, if the same is submitted in accordance with law, within a further period of one month.

¶29

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

¶34

WP(C).No.25577 OF 2020(V)

¶35

..4..

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 14.11.2008 ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER

¶39

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.4.2016 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR , WAYANAD WITH LEGIBLE COPY

¶40

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 9.12.2019 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.8.2020 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GI) EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.10.2020 IN WPC NO.18736/2020

¶41

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 10.8.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY DATED 5.10.2020 WITH LEGIBLE COPY EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.10.2020 IN WPC NO.18726/2020

Thomas Sebastian v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thomas Sebastian v. 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

Sasikumar.M Vs Kozhikkode Muncipal Corporation

Sudheer.C Vs the Panchayat Secretary

Haneefa Vs the Municipal Secretary

Sreedharan U.P Vs the Thripprangottor Grama Panchayat

Ashik a. Shukoor, Vs the Adoor Municipality

Bindu Jose Vs the District Collector, Ernakulam