Allowed

Raju Antony v. Taluk Tahsildar & Executive Magistrate

Kerala HC4 Aug 2023Crl.MC/4156/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three Criminal Miscellaneous cases filed by quarry owners challenging orders imposed by the Executive Magistrate regarding fine deposits and possession of puramboke land were allowed and impugned orders quashed, permitting revenue authorities to proceed with future violations.

What did the court decide?

The impugned orders in these cases are quashed. Revenue authorities are free to proceed with notice to petitioners if there is any violation of the Land Conservancy Act.

Raju Antony Vs Taluk Tahsildar & Executive… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 904 OF 2014

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

K.M.JOSEPH
KIZHUKKARAKKATT HOUSE, KOORACHUNDU.P.O.,
KOZHIKODE.

¶8

BY ADV SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1TAHSILDAR
KOYILANDY-673305.

¶11

2STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SMT. MAYA M.N.,PP

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.08.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.4156/2013, 5647/2013, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

-2-

¶16

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶18

PRESENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶20

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 4156 OF 2013

¶21

PETITIONER/S:

¶22

RAJU ANTONY
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O.ANTONY, ETTIYIL VEEDU, KALLANODE, KOORACHUNDU
P.O., KOYILANDY TALUK.

¶23

BY ADV SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶24

RESPONDENT/S:

¶25

1 TALUK TAHSILDAR & EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE

¶26

KOYILANDY.

¶27

2 STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶28

OTHER PRESENT:

¶29

SMT. MAYA M.N.,PP

¶30

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.08.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.904/2014 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

-3-

¶32

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶33

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶34

PRESENT

¶35

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶36

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 5647 OF 2013

¶37

PETITIONER/S:

¶38

SAJI MATHEW VAZHAKKAMALAYIL

¶39

CHERUKAD PO, ATHYODI VIA, KAYANNA, KOYILANDY
BY ADV SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶40

RESPONDENT/S:

¶41

1 THASILDAR AND EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE

¶42

KOYILANDY 673 572.

¶43

2 STATE OF KERALA

¶44

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶45

OTHER PRESENT:

¶46

SMT. MAYA M.N.,PP

¶47

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.08.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.904/2014 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶48

-4-

¶49

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶50

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶51

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014 =============================================================

¶52

Dated this the 4^th day of August, 2023

¶53

ORDER

¶54

These Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are filed challenging the

¶55

order passed by the Executive Magistrate, Koyilandy. According to the petitioners, they are licensed quarry owners and they are doing the quarrying work in the property licensed to them without any complaints either from the authorities concerned or from the general public. The petitioners received Annexure I order from the 1^st respondent in these cases asking the petitioners to deposit huge amount towards the fine imposed as per Section 320(2) Cr.P.C. The petitioners are also directed to remit the amount within 45 days. The petitioners are also proceeded with by the 1^st respondent on the allegation that they have committed offence under Section 378 IPC for having removed granite from a puramboke land situated near to their quarry to an extent of 21.25 cents of revenue land in Kurachundu villatge. It is stated that the petitioners are liable for the same and liable to pay a fine in accordance with PWD schedule also.

¶56

-5-

¶57

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶58

When these cases are came up for consideration in the year 2013, this Court stayed the impugned orders in these case and that interim orders are in force even now. Today these Crl.M.Cs came up for consideration, this Court directed the public prosecutor to get instructions. The Public Prosecutor submitted that impugned orders can be set aside but the revenue authorities may be allowed to proceed in accordance to the Land Conservancy Act. If that be so, these Crl.M.Cs can be allowed and the impugned orders can be set aside. If there is any violation of any provisions of the Land Conservancy Act, the authorities are free to proceed in accordance with law.

¶59

Therefore, these Crl.M.Cs are allowed. The impugned orders in these cases are quashed. The revenue authorities are free to proceed in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioners, if there is any violation of the Land Conservancy proceedings.

¶60

sd/-

¶61

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶62

das

¶63

-6-

¶64

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶65

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4156/2013

¶66

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶67

ANNEXURE-I: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
PURCHASE OBTAINED FROM PERAMBRA LAND
TRIBUNAL DATED 23.3.1994.

¶68

ANNEXURE-II: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX
RECEIPT DATED 12.7.2012.

¶69

ANNEXURE-III: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.8.2013.
ANNEXURE-IV: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
11.9.13.

¶70

-7-

¶71

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶72

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5647/2013

¶73

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶74

ANNEXURE 1 COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY
THGE IST RESPONDENT DATED 4/11/13 IN
REF NO. D1 9120/13

¶75

-8-

¶76

Crl.M.C.No. 4156 & 5647 of 2013 and 904 of 2014

¶77

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 904/2014

¶78

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶79

ANX.I. COPY OF THE ORDER NO. D1
14088/13 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 6-1-2014.

Raju Antony v. Taluk Tahsildar & Executive Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Antony v. Taluk Tahsildar & Executive Magistrate

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

Alex.S.S Vs State of Kerala

Pranesh R Vs State of Kerala

Prabhakara Rai Vs Kerala Gramin Bank

K.M.Joseph Vs Tahsildar

T.P. Jayaprakashan Vs State of Kerala

Sayooji Satheesh @ Swarnappallan Vs Biju