Mithravidyalaya Educational & … vs State Of Kerala on 22 September, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 29106 of 2010(K)


1. MITHRAVIDYALAYA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,

4. THE TAHZILDAR,

5. THE GEOLOGIST,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :22/09/2010

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
                 W.P.(C) NO. 29106 OF 2010 (K)
                 =====================

         Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2010

                         J U D G M E N T

Petitioner’s grievance is that they had applied for permit for

levelling the school compound for further construction and the

Geologist did not issue permit as sought for. It is stated that on

receipt of the application, the Revenue Divisional Officer called for

a report from the Tahsildar and that the Tahsildar submitted

Ext.P3 report. Petitioner also submits that based on Ext.P3, the

Revenue Divisional Officer issued Ext.P4 communication to the

Geologist directing the issuance of permit as sought for by the

petitioner subject to the conditions mentioned in Ext.P4. It is

stated that thereafter petitioner submitted Ext.P5 requesting for

waiver of royalty. Petitioner also refers to Ext.P6 and contends

that royalty is not payable.

2. Irrespective of the contentions now raised, as at

present, fact remains that Geologist has not passed orders on the

application made by the petitioner duly adverting to Ext.P4

communication issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer and

Ext.P6, the Government Order dated 5/4/2010. In that view of the

WPC No. 29106/10
:2 :

matter, at this stage, what is required to be ordered is that the

Geologist should pass orders on the application.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 5th

respondent to pass orders on the application made by the

petitioner for removal of red earth in the light of Ext.P4

communication issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer and

Ext.P6 Government Order dated 5/4/2010. Orders as above, shall

be passed at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of

this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp