Background

In a recent court judgment, the petitioners, who were aggrieved by the non-renewal of their Ext.P2 movement permit to remove earth, have been granted relief by the court. The permit was originally issued in their favor, but they were unable to act upon it due to an injunction passed by a civil court. By the time the injunction was vacated, the period stipulated in the Ext.P2 permit had expired, leading the petitioners to seek a renewal of the permit, which was not being granted by the 2nd respondent/Geologist.

Arguments

The petitioners' counsel argued that the non-renewal of the Ext.P2 permit was unjustified, as the delay in removing the earth was not due to any fault of the petitioners, but rather due to the civil court injunction. The 2nd respondent/Geologist, on the other hand, had not renewed the permit, leading to the petitioners' grievance.

Court's Analysis and Reasoning

After hearing the arguments from both sides and considering the attendant facts and circumstances, the court directed the 2nd respondent/Geologist to consider and pass orders on the Ext.P6 representation seeking the renewal of the Ext.P2 permit within 30 days from the date of the judgment (10.06.2024). The court recognized that the delay in removing the earth was not the fault of the petitioners and that they should not be penalized for it.

Decision

The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent/Geologist to consider and pass orders on the Ext.P6 representation seeking the renewal of the Ext.P2 permit within 30 days. This decision provides relief to the petitioners and ensures that they can proceed with the earth removal process, which was previously hindered by the non-renewal of the permit.