Disposed

Ratheesh P.S, v. the Director of Mining and Geology

Kerala HC5 Aug 2022WP(C)/21754/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a quarrying operator where the No Objection Certificate's time limit for Environmental Clearance expiry was extended by a government circular. The Court directed the District Collector to reconsider the extension application within six weeks, reserving merit assessment.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 2nd Respondent-District Collector to reconsider the application for enrollment of time granted in No Objection Certificate and take a decision within six weeks.

Ratheesh P.S, Vs the Director of Mining and Geology — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 21754 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

RATHEESH P.S, AGED 47 YEARS MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. HIGHRANGE GRANITES, BALABRAM P.O, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN 685 552. BY ADVS. SANTHOSH MATHEW ARUN THOMAS VEENA RAVEENDRAN KARTHIKA MARIA ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL ABI BENNY AREECKAL MATHEW NEVIN THOMAS KURIAN ANTONY MATHEW

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

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

¶9

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI, CIVIL STATION, COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI DISTRICT- 685 603.

¶10

3 THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, IDUKKI DISTRICT- 685 603. BY ADVS. SRI.SYAMANTHAK B S, GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 21754 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 5^th day of August, 2022

¶16

The petitioner intends to commence a Quarry in Government land. The petitioner approached the District Collector and the District Collector issued Ext.P1 No Objection Certificate to run quarrying operations in certain property situated in Karunapuram Village in Udumbanchola Taluk, Idukki District. Ext.P1 No Objection Certificate was issued on 29.12.2019 on a condition that the Environmental Clearance under SEIAA's notification should be submitted within two years of receipt of the No Objection Certificate, failing which the No Objection Certificate shall stand cancelled.

¶17

The petitioner submits that due to Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner could not obtain Environmental Clearance. Therefore, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3

¶18

WP(C) NO. 21754 OF 2022

¶19

¶20

representation before the District Collector on 04.09.2021 for extension of two years time granted as per Ext.P1. As Ext.P3 representation was not entertained, the petitioner approached

¶21

this Court filing WP(C) No.21356/2021 and this Court on 01.11.2021, directed the 1^st respondent-District Collector to take up the representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the District Collector has not taken any decision inspite of the directions of this Court.

¶22

Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and contested the writ petition. The Government Pleader filed a Memo producing a decision taken by the District Collector on 29.12.2021. The District Collector stated that when a relaxation was granted in respect of the conditions earlier, the Land Revenue Commissioner had interfered in the matter and therefore the petitioner's application for relaxation cannot be considered.

¶23

WP(C) NO. 21754 OF 2022

¶24

¶25

Counsel for the petitioner produced Ext.P5 Circular

¶26

dated 08.02.2022 issued by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Revenue Department addressed to all the District Collectors directing that in cases where No Objection Certificate has been issued for quarrying, if holders of the No Objection Certificate could not obtain all the requisite licences

¶27

and permissions, the period can be extended for a further period of one year.

¶28

It is clear that after the proceedings dated 29.12.2021 of the District Collector, the Government has taken a decision to enlarge the time granted to the holders of No Objection Certificate in genuine cases.

¶29

In view of the said Circular dated 08.02.2022, this Court is of the view that the application submitted by the petitioner is liable to be considered afresh. In the light of Ext.P5, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent-District Collector to reconsider the application for enlargement of time

¶30

WP(C) NO. 21754 OF 2022

¶31

¶32

granted as per condition No.1 in Ext.P1 No Objection Certificate. A decision in this regard shall be taken, within a period of six weeks. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

spk

WP(C) NO. 21754 OF 2022

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21754/2022

¶40

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED 29.12.2019 ISSUED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI TO THE PETITIONER.

¶41

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR GRANT OF QUARRYING LEASE BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY THROUGH THE GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, IDUKKI , ON 01.01.2020. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ON 04.09.2021. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.11.2021 IN W.P.C NO. 21356 OF 2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶42

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY OF THE STATE OF KERALA, REVENUE (P) DEPARTMENT, TO ALL THE DISTRICT COLLECTORS ON 08/02/2022 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29/03/2022 ISSUED BY THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI.

¶43

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL

Ratheesh P.S, v. the Director of Mining and Geology

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratheesh P.S, v. the Director of Mining and Geology

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

Sherly Mathew Vs Kerala State Election Commission

Shamsudheen, Vs Ittiva Grama Panchayat

Sumathy Vs State of Kerala

Mayakkara Seithalavi Vs Cherukavu Grama Panchayath

Khalid Vs State of Kerala

Ramachandran A.K Vs Kaiparambu Grama Panchayath