Disposed

Khujson Industries, v. the District Geologist

Kerala HC12 Jul 2024WP(C)/23471/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, running a metal crusher unit, petitioned for renewal of its expired dealer's license. The respondent conditioned consideration on payment of dues related to illegal stone extraction from an adjacent property owned by a third party. The Court held that the properties are distinct and directed the respondent to consider the application after hearing the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider and dispose of the application for renewal of dealer's license after hearing the petitioner within two weeks.

Khujson Industries, Vs the District Geologist — Mining and Natural Resources | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 23471 OF 2024

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

KHUJSON INDUSTRIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR.C.P.MUHAMMED ABDUL BASHEER, AGED 64 YEARS, SON OF KUNJARAMU HAJI, CHARUPADIKKAL HOUSE, THALAKKASSERY P.O., PATTITHARA, THRITHALA TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679534 BY ADVS. P.M.ZIRAJ IRFAN ZIRAJ

¶6

RESPONDENT:

¶7

THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678001

¶8

OTHER PRESENT:

¶9

VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

WP(C) NO. 23471 OF 2024 2

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

The petitioner is running a metal crusher unit at Palakkad. Exts.P1 to P3 are necessary license and permits issued by the concerned authorities to the petitioner. Ext.P1 is the dealer’s license dated 22.03.2023 issued by the respondent to the petitioner. The validity of Ext.P1 expired on 19.02.2024. Hence, the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application on 21.02.2024 before the respondent for renewal of dealer’s license. Since the respondent did not consider Ext.P4 in time, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(c) 19798 of 2024. In the meanwhile, the respondent issued Ext.P6 order informing that Ext.P4 application of the petitioner could be considered only after payment of the royalty, cost and fine for the granite building stone illegally removed from the adjacent property. The Department of Mining and Geology initiated proceedings against the landlord of the adjacent property from where the granite building stone was illegally extracted by way of Ext.P7 notice.

¶14

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Vidya Kuriakose, the learned Government Pleader.

¶15

The definite case of the petitioner is that, the property over which the petitioner seeks dealer’s license is different and distinct from the property in respect of which Ext.P7 demand notice was issued and hence, the petitioner’s dealer’s license cannot be refused on account of the alleged dues

¶16

WP(C) NO. 23471 OF 2024 3

¶17

in respect of the said neighbouring property. On last posting, the learned

¶18

Government Pleader was directed to get specific instructions in this regard. The learned Government Pleader submits that, the petitioner is not the owner of the adjacent quarry. Hence, the respondent cannot refuse to consider the application for renewal of dealer’s license of the petitioner only on the ground of alleged dues in respect of the neighbouring quarry. In these circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 application, in accordance with

¶19

law, after hearing the petitioner, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

mus

¶24

WP(C) NO. 23471 OF 2024 4

¶25

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23471/2024

¶26

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF 22.3.2023 ISSUED PETITIONER	THE BY	DEALERS LICENCE DATED THE RESPONDENT TO THE
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF T 18.7.2023 ISSUED B CONTROL BOARD	HE C Y TH TO TH	ONSENT TO OPERATE DATED E KERALA STATE POLLUTION E PETITIONER
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF T ISSUED BY THE PA	HE D TTAN	&O LICENCE DATED 25.1.2024 CHERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF TH	E APP	LICATION SUBMITTED BY THE
	PETITIONER DA RESPONDENT	TED	21.2.2024 BEFORE THE
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF REGARDING PAYM	THE ENT O	E-CHELLAN DATED 21.2.2024 R APPLICATION FEE
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF RESPONDENT DAT	THE ED 15	ORDER ISSUED BY THE .6.2024
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF 17.05.2024 ISSUED ADJACENT LAND QUARRYING OPER	THE BY OWN ATION	DEMAND NOTICE DATED THE RESPONDENT TO THE ER FROM WHERE ILLEGAL HAS BEEN DONE

Khujson Industries, v. the District Geologist

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khujson Industries, v. the District Geologist

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

M.Shahul Hameed, Vs the Tahsildar

Mymoonath Vs the Tahsildar, Thiruvananthapuram Taluk Office

N.Divakaran Vs David Livingston

K.Babu Premraj Vs District Collector

Azad.C. Vs District Survey Superintendant

Vishnu Raj.R Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer