Disposed

Jimmy Dominic, v. State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority

Kerala HC6 Jun 2024WP(C)/7463/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition regarding alleged illegal mining by the 5th respondent. The court directed the SEIAA to consider the petitioner's representation within one month, after affording a hearing, and ensured the quarry ceases functioning without necessary licences.

What did the court decide?

Direction to SEIAA to consider representation within one month and ensure quarry stops functioning without necessary licences.

Jimmy Dominic, Vs State Environmental Impact… — Mining and Natural Resources | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 7463 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

1JIMMY DOMINIC,
AGED 56 YEARS
KARIPPAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARAKKAD, VENGANELLUR.P.O.,
CHELKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680586

¶8

BY ADVS.

¶9

B.S.SWATHI KUMAR
ANITHA RAVINDRAN
HARISANKAR N UNNI
K.MINI MOLE (M-1356)
PRAKASH MATHEW

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY, 4TH FLOOR, KSRTC BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN - 695001

¶12

2 THE DIRECTOR, MINING AND GEOLOGY, DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM PALACE.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004

¶13

3 THE GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680020

¶14

4 THE TAHASILDAR, THALAPPALLY TALUK, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR, PIN - 680582

¶15

5 KICHU.K.RAVI, KUZHPILLI HOUSE, NORTH MAZHUVANNOOR, VALAMBOOR.P.O., ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682032

¶16

6 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, INDIRA PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, JARBAGH ROAD, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110003

¶17

*7 SHAMSAD. P, W/O T A MAJEED, CLASSIC III, CHOICE PARK, POTTAKKUZHI, ERNAKULAM – 682 026

¶18

*IS IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 19.03.2024 IN IA NO.2/2024

¶19

W.P.(C.) No.7463 of 2024

¶20

¶21

BY ADVS.
SRI.AJITH VISWANATHAN, GP
SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN, R1
SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU, R5
SRI.RANJITH THAMBAN (SR.) - R7
V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
SAJU S. DOMINIC
NEENU BERNATH
P.R.REENA

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

W.P.(C.) No.7463 of 2024

¶24

¶25

C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶26

W.P.(C.) No.7463 of 2024

¶27

Dated this the 06^th day of June, 2024

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner approached this Court alleging illegal mining by the additional 5^th respondent in violation of the relevant provisions of law.

¶30

When the matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Ext.P14 representation has already been filed before the 1^st respondent and that the petitioner, for the time being, only seeks a disposal of the said representation, in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by the Court.

¶31

Even this limited prayer was opposed by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 7^th respondent by citing a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Souhrada Charitable Club v. Union of India [2020 (1) KLT 70]. Based on the said judgment, the learned counsel

¶32

W.P.(C.) No.7463 of 2024

¶33

¶34

would submit that there is no provision to hear a third party, as per the rules.

¶35

In view of the limited relief sought for, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the 1^st respondent authority to consider Ext.P14 representation in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders therein, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as also, respondents 5 and 7. The respondent authorities will ensure that the quarry concerned will not function, unless enabled by all necessary licences and permits in accordance with law.

¶36

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

C. JAYACHANDRAN

JUDGE

SKP/06-06

W.P.(C.) No.7463 of 2024

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7463/2024

¶44

`PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:` `EXHIBIT P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL` `CLEARANCE GRANTED PROJECTS OF VENGALLUR VILLAGE`
`EXHIBIT P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE DAMAGES` `CAUSED TO THE PETITIONER'S HOUSE.`
`EXHIBIT P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY` `THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED` `9-5-2023 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES.`
`EXHIBIT P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF ITEM NO. 127.20` `WITH FILE NO. 2317/EC6/2023/SEIAA`
`EXHIBIT P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE` `MINUTES OF THE 153RD MEETING OF THE 1ST` `RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ITEM NO.20 OF THE MINUTES OF` `THE 137TH MEETING OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT P7`	`TRUE COPY OF THE WEBSITE STATUS OF THE PROJECT` `OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT P8`	`TRUE COPY OF THE GEOGLE EARTH PHOTOS OF THE` `AREA`
`EXHIBIT P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE 129TH` `MEETING OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT P10`	`TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING` `DATED 30-1-2024`
`EXHIBIT P11`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A7-9089/2021 DATED` `18-3-2023 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT P12`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NO. B3-4190/21 DATED 20-` `5-2021`
`EXHIBIT P13`	`TRUE` `COPY` `OF` `THE` `REPORT` `NO.` `DOTHR-DMG/2716/2022-M DATED 20-12-2022`
`EXHIBIT P14`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE` `THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12-5-2024`
`RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS:`
`ANNEXURE R7(A)`	`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT` `IN DEVASSIA R V AND OTHERS VS. SUB REGISTRAR,` `IDUKKI AND OTHERS [2015 (1) KHC 805]`
`ANNEXURE R7(B)`	`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT` `IN STATE OF KERALA VS. M C GEORGE [2023 KHC` `2895]`
`RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS:`
`EXHIBIT R5(A)`	`TRUE COPY OF THE GOOGLE IMAGE SHOWING THE` `DISTANCE BETWEEN THE QUARRY AND RESIDENTIAL` `BUILDING OF THE PETITIONER` `TRUE COPY` `P.A. TO JUDGE`

Jimmy Dominic, v. State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jimmy Dominic, v. State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank, Asset Recovery & Management ( Arm) Branch Vs The Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Salim Aniyan Kunnummel Vs Authorized Officer

Abdul Saleem K.M. Vs the District Registrar

Usman Sha Vs the Sub Registrar

K.C.Prakashan Vs Tahsildar (Lr)

Faisal Vs the District Collector