Disposed

Fr. Paulose Thomas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Nov 2022WP(C)/4877/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by Fr. Paulose Thomas seeking quashing of police stop memos and inhibition of quarrying works. The court made the interim stay order absolute but reserved the right for authorities to take statutory action.

What did the court decide?

Interim order dated 28.02.2012 made absolute; liberty granted to competent authority to take action if statutory violation occurs.

Fr. Paulose Thomas Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 4877 OF 2012

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

FR. PAULOSE THOMAS
S/O. LATE THOMAS, AGED 60 YEARS,
CHITTAYATHU HOUSE, NELLIMATTOM.P.O,
KOTHAMANGALAM.
BY ADV SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA.P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 661.

¶10

3 S.I OF POLICE OONNUKAL POLICE STATION, OONNUKAL.P.O, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 693.

¶11

4 THE KAVALANGADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NELLIMATTOM.P.O, KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 693. BY ADV SRI.GOKUL DAS V.V.H.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

0
SRI.K.M.FAISAL, GP

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 29.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.4877/2012

¶16

¶17

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶18

W.P.(C).No.4877 of 2012

¶19

Dated this the 29^th day of November, 2022

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

¶22

i. Issue a writ of certiorari or other writ, order or direction, quashing Exhibit P-10 and P-11 stop memos issued by the 3^rd Respondent dated 25-022012 as are without any statutory authority.

¶23

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus to the 3^rd Respondent not to cause any obstruction to the peaceful works of extracting granite by chemical, in the property of the petitioner.

¶24

iii. To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts of the case.

¶25

(SIC)

¶26

When this writ petition came up for consideration

¶27

on 28.02.2022, this Court passed the following order:

¶28

“Admit.

¶29

The learned Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. Issue notice by speed post to the 4^th respondent. Prima facie I do not find any power on the Police to

¶30

WP(C).No.4877/2012

¶31

¶32

issue Exts.P10 and P11 memos, which are impugned in this writ petition. Therefore, there would be a stay of further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P10 and P11. However, I make it clear that this will not stand in the way of any other appropriate authorities of the Government taking appropriate action in accordance with law on the same subject matter.”

¶33

The interim order is in force even now. In the light of the same, the impugned orders can be set aside granting liberty to the the competent authority to take action, if there is violation of any statutory provisions.

¶34

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

¶35

The interim order dated 28.02.2012 is

¶36

made absolute.

¶37

It is made clear that this will not stand in the way of taking appropriate action by the competent authority in accordance to law on the subject matter.

¶38

Sd/-\

¶39

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

WP(C).No.4877/2012

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4877/2012

¶44

`PETITIO` `Exhibit`	`NER EXHI` `P1`	`BITS` `TRUE COPY OF` `CERTIFICATE I` `ON 25-03-2008` `PANCHAYATH.`	`THE NO OBJECTION` `SSUED TO THE PETITIONER` `FROM KAVALANGADU GRAMA`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`TRUE COPY OF` `ISSUED BY THE` `DEPARTMENT.`	`THE QUARRYING PERMIT` `MINING AND GEOLOGY`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`TRUE COPY OF` `OF THE 2ND RE` `ISSUE DATED 2`	`THE ONE OF THE PROCEEDING` `SPONDENT IN AN IDENTICAL` `7-12-2011.`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`TRUE COPY OF` `SENIOR GEOLOG` `ISSUED TO THE`	`THE PROCEEDING OF THE` `IST DATED 19-01-2012` `PETITIONER.`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`TRUE COPY OF` `VILLAGE OFFIC`	`THE PROCEEDING OF THE` `ER DATED 13-06-2011.`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY OF` `22/06/2011.`	`THE LETTER DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`TRUE COPY OF` `2011, FORWARD` `BY THE KHADI` `COMMISSION TO` `KOTHAMANGALAM`	`THE LETTER DATED 10-03-` `ING THE PROJECT PROPOSAL` `AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES` `STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE` `BRANCH.`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`TRUE COPY OF` `C.C.495/2007` `ACQUITTING TH` `WIFE.`	`THE JUDGMENT IN` `DATED 29/11/2011` `E PETITIONER, HIS SON AND`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE COPY OF` `REPORTS REGAR` `THE POLICE OF` `STATION.`	`THE ONE OF THE PAPER` `DING THE ACTIVITIES OF` `FICERS IN THE SAME`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`TRUE COPY OF` `25.02.2012.`	`THE MEMO DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`TRUE COPY OF` `25.02.2012 IS` `RESPONDENT.`	`THE STOP MEMO DATED` `SUED BY TH 3RD`

Fr. Paulose Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fr. Paulose Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sheela P.P. Vs the Manager

Kerala Gandhi Smaraka Nidhi Vs Sri.K.Ramachandra Kumar(Died)

Deepthi Sivarajan Vs State of Kerala

Johnson Vs Managing Director

Ravindran G. Vs the District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram

Gfeetha S. Vs District Collector