Allowed

Mubaraq Granites v. Sri. V.R Premkumar IAS

Kerala HC9 Nov 2022Con.Case(C)/1251/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt case, the court addressed the respondent's failure to pass consequential orders directed under a Government Order within the stipulated two-week limit. The court held that non-compliance justified reopening the case if steps were not taken immediately.

What did the court decide?

The respondent directed to do the needful and pass necessary consequential orders within two weeks immediately.

Mubaraq Granites Vs Sri. V.R Premkumar IAS — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶5

CON.CASE(C) NO. 1251 OF 2022

¶6

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

MUBARAQ GRANITES WEST CHATHALLUR P.O, OTHAYI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676541, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER A.M.MUHAMMED ALI, S/O A.M.KUNHIMUHAMMED, ATHIMANNIL HOUSE, PATTARKULAM, NARUKARA (PO), MANJERI, MALAPPURAM - 676122. BY ADVS. K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)(S-571)

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

SRI. V.R PREMKUMAR IAS AGED 34 YEARS FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, CHAIRPERSON/DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THE DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, UPHILL, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676122 BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

SMT.K.G.SAROJINI, GP

¶13

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

CO(C).No.1251/2022

¶15

¶16

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶17

Contempt Case (C).No.1251 of 2022 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 09^th day of November, 2022

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This contempt case is filed alleging violation of the directions issued by this Court. The directions issued by this Court is extracted hereunder:

¶20

Exts.P12 and P13 as far as the petitioner is concerned is quashed.

¶21

The 3^rd respondent is directed to pass consequential order in the light of G.O.(Rt) No.388/2022/DMD dated 28.04.2022, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶22

I make it clear that if the petitioner is aggrieved by any of the conditions in GO(Rt) No.388/2022/DMD date//d 28.04.2022, they are at liberty to challenge the same, in accordance to law.

¶23

G.O.(Rt) No.388/2022/DMD dated 28.04.2022 is

¶24

produced as Ext.R1(a) in this contempt case. On a perusal of the above Government Order it is clear that the Government

¶25

CO(C).No.1251/2022

¶26

¶27

examined the matter in detail and issued certain directions to operate the quarry namely M/s.Mubaraq Granites. Certain conditions are mentioned in Ext.R1(a) as serial Nos.1 to 6. Most of these conditions can be complied only if the quarry is functioning. An affidavit is filed by the respondent in this contempt case in which, paragraphs 8 and 12 are relevant and the same is extracted hereunder:

¶28

“8. Since this Honourable Court was pleased direct me to pass consequential order in the light of G.O.(Rt)388/2022/DMD dated 28-4-2022, I keenly studied the said Govt. Order wherein it is categorically stated that the directions issued by the government in connection with the quarrying operations of the quarry namely Mubarak Granites is being properly followed. The 2^nd direction is that, 'The District Collector, Malappuram shall be responsible for ensuring that the quarry owner follows all these measures prescribed and report to the District Disaster Management Authority (DDMA), Malappuram'. Since heavy responsibility was casted upon me by the directions of the government, I addressed to the Commissioner, Kerala State Disaster Management Authority, Thiruvananthapuram vide letter dated 18.10.2022. The true copy of the letter dated 18.10.2022 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure R1(b).

¶29

CO(C).No.1251/2022

¶30

¶31

I was advised to ensure that the quarrying operations are done following the measures prescribed. And so I was constrained to constitute committee of experts to ascertain whether the blasting operations are in order as recommended by the NIT, Karnataka, that too to ensure the government directions. It is humbly submitted that the Kerala State Disaster Management Authority vide letter No. SEOC_GEN_2968_2019 dated 6-112022 has given concurrence by permitting me to directly obtain service of technical experts from NIT, Karnataka. The true copy of the letter No. SEOC_GEN_2968_2019 dated 6-11-2022 issued by the Kerala State Disaster Management Authority to me is produced herewith and marked as Annexure R1(c). Accordingly the committees were constituted headed by Addl. District Magistrate and District Geologist, Malappuram vide order No. DCMPM/5311/2022-DM1 dated 8-7-2022. The true copy of the order of the respondent No.DCMPM/5311/2022-DM1 dated 8-7-2022 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R1(d). The committees constituted are directed to provide me proper reports after detailed studies and thereby I can ensure that the quarrying operations in Mubarak Granites would be by following all the measures prescribed by the government order and the recommendations of the NIT Karnataka, Suratkal.

¶32

CO(C).No.1251/2022

¶33

¶34

It is most humbly submitted that there is no willful laches or negligence from my part in the matter of complying with the judgment of this Honourable Court. I hereby undertake that I shall take necessary action regarding the issuance of operational clearance to the petitioner quarry in accordance with the report of the expert committee constituted as per Annexure-R1(d) immediately after the receipt of report of NIT Karnataka.”

¶35

I am not satisfied with the affidavit filed by the respondent. When this Court directed that consequential order after G.O.(Rt) No.388/2022/DMD dated 28.04.2022 is to be passed within two weeks, and if the respondent want further time to comply the same, the remedy is to file an extension petition before this Court. Without filing an extension petition or filing a petition to review the judgment, the action of the respondent in constituting the committee etc cannot be accepted. I don’t want to make any further observation. In paragraph 12 of the affidavit it is stated that the respondent undertakes that he will take necessary action regarding the issuance of operational clearance to the quarry of the petitioner in accordance with the report of the expert committee constituted as per Annexure R1(d) immediately

¶36

CO(C).No.1251/2022

¶37

¶38

after the receipt of report of NIT Karnataka. When there is a direction from this Court to do certain things within a time limit, it is the duty of the respondent to do the needful immediately. If there is any practical difficulty to comply the direction within the time limit, the remedy is to file an extension petition.

¶39

Therefore, there will be a direction to the respondent to do the needful immediately and pass necessary consequential orders based on G.O.(Rt) No.388/2022/DMD dated 28.04.2022 within two weeks from today. If no steps are taken within two weeks, the petitioner is free to reopen the contempt case once again.

¶40

With the above observation, this contempt case is closed. Issue a copy of this order to the Government Pleader for conveying the same to the respondent.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

CO(C).No.1251/2022

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1251/2022

¶47

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.05.2022 IN W.P (C) NO: 19044/2020 Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH THE RESPONDENT DATED 02-06-2022 Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FOR ANNEXURE B DATED 02-06-2022 Annexure D TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO: DCMPM/5311/2022-DM1 DATED 14.06.2022 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENT Annexure E A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE REPORT OF NIT SURATHKAL DATED NIL Annexure F A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O (RT) NO: 388/2022/DMD DATED 28.04.2022 Annexure G A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2207-2022 IN CONT.CASE.CIVIL.NO.1251/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. Annexure H A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DCMPM/5311/2022-DMI DATED 08.07.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT Annexure I A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM DATED 11.10.2022 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R(1)A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O(Rt) 388/2022/DMD dated 28.04.2022 ANNEXURE R(1)B TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.10.2022 ANNEXURE R(1)C TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.SEOC-GEN2968-2019 DATED 06.11.2022 ANNEXURE R1(D) ORDER NO. DCMPM/5311/2022-DM1 DATED 08/07/2022

Mubaraq Granites v. Sri. V.R Premkumar IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mubaraq Granites v. Sri. V.R Premkumar IAS

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

Hameed K. Vs the Registrar, University of Kerala

Smt.D.Sajini Vs the Registrar,University of Kerala

M.P.Sasidharan Vs Director, Lbs Centre of Science

Dhamodharan Pillai Vs the Assistant Engineer & Another

Sailesh Mohan Sharma, Director Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization

Sailesh Mohan Sharma, Directors Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization