High Court Kerala High Court

Raju.T.T. vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 24 April, 2007

Kerala High Court
Raju.T.T. vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 24 April, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 13511 of 2007(H)


1. RAJU.T.T., PALAZHI THACHAMPARAMBIL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. V.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR,

3. T.RAGHUNATHAN, THIRUTHIKADU,

4. MANOJ.S., PATHIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.A.SREEJITH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :24/04/2007

 O R D E R
              S. SIRI JAGAN & K.R. UDAYABHANU, JJ

              =================================

                       W.P.(C) NO. 13511 OF 2007

              =================================

                 Dated this the 24th day of April 2007




                                  JUDGMENT

Siri Jagan,J

The petitioner extracted clay on the basis of Ext.P1 Mining

Permit issued to him under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession

Rules. The complaint of the petitioner is that respondents 2 to 4

are obstructing the mining activities which are being done strictly

in accordance with Ext.P1-permit. The respondents 2 to 4

appears through counsel and contest the writ petition. Although

they would assert that they are not in any way obstructing the

petitioner in his mining activities, they would submit that the

petitioner is conducting mining activities without complying with

the conditions in Ext.P1. They would submit that they have

approached the Panchayat and the Revenue Divisional Officer

against the illegal activities of the petitioner in the matter of

extracting clay.

W.P.(C) NO. 13511 OF 2007 : 2 :

2. After hearing both sides, we are of the opinion that

although the respondents 2 to 4 have a right to approach the

appropriate authorities to point out any illegality committed by

the petitioner if the petitioner is conducting mining activities

against the Rules, they have no right to obstruct the petitioner

from exercising his right under Ext.P1- permit. In the above

circumstances, recording the submission of respondents 2 to 4

that they are not obstructing the petitioner in the mining of clay

as per Ext.P1, we direct the 1st respondent to afford adequate

police protection to the petitioner to conduct mining activities as

per Ext.P1, if the petitioner is conducting the mining activities in

accordance with Ext.P1 permit issued to him and the rules

governing such permit as per the current permit or as per the

renewed permit, if the petitioner gets the same renewed after

its expiry. The Sub Inspector, if necessary, may get assistance

from the concerned Geologist to ensure that the petitioner

conducts the mining strictly in accordance with Ext. P1.

3. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above

W.P.(C) NO. 13511 OF 2007 : 3 :

This judgment shall not stand in the way of any authority

either under the Kerala Mining and Mineral Concession Rules or

the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act taking any action if they find any

illegal activity by the petitioner in the matter of mining clay.

K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUGE.

RV

W.P.(C) NO. 13511 OF 2007 : 4 :