IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 142 of 2009(P)
1. KAVALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
3. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.BABY
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :13/02/2009
O R D E R
S. Siri Jagan, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W. P (C) No. 142 of 2009
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this, the 13th February, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is a Panchayat. They are aggrieved by the prohibition
imposed in the matter of collecting sand from Chembenkuzhi kadavu
which, according to them, falls within the jurisdiction of the
Panchayat. But, they have been prevented from collecting sand from
that Kadavu on the ground that the Kadavu falls within forest area
and under the Forest Act, non-forest activities cannot be permitted
in forest area except with the prior permission from the Central
Government. The dispute raised by the Panchayat has been referred
to a High Power Committee appointed by the Government and the
Government has, by Ext. P7, relying on the report of the High Power
Committee, decided the dispute in which Chembenkuzhi kadavu has
not been exempted and it has been confirmed that Chembenkuzhi
kadavu falls within the forest area. The petitioner is challenging Ext.
P7 in this writ petition.
2. The petitioner submits that the Government itself had
subsequently, by Ext. P9 order, granted permission for collecting sand
in respect of some other Kadavus, which was not permitted as per
Ext. P7. Learned Government Pleader submits that Ext. P9 is only a
clarification of Ext. P7 order and there is nothing in Ext. P9 which
goes against Ext. P7.
3. I am of opinion that the petitioner’s remedy lies in
approaching the Government for appropriate clarification in the
matter. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is
dismissed.
Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.
Tds/