1. The petitioners are residents of Parakkadavu Grama Panchayat. Their residential houses are situated near to a rock quarry conducted by the fifth respondent. The petitioners allege that the fifth respondent is running the quarry illegally, that there are residential houses situated within a distance of 50 metres from the quarry and that under Rule 29(1) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967, quarrying operations cannot be conducted within 50 metres from any reservoir, tanks, canals, roads, bridges, other public works, residential buildings, etc. except under and in accordance with the previous permission of the State Government. The fifth respondent does not have such permission from the State Government, they contend. The petitioners also allege that the quarry run by the fifth respondent has a depth of more than 150 feet. The petitioners have also stated that due to the quarrying operations conducted by the fifth respondent, serious damage has been caused to their houses. They have also stated that the water table in the wells of the locality has been fallen as a result of quarrying operations. On these and other grounds, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

" (i) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 1 to 4 to take appropriate steps and to ensure that the quarrying activities carried on by the fifth respondent in the above mentioned property is stopped forthwith.

(ii) to issue a writ or order commanding the second respondent to cancel the permits issued to the fifth respondent for quarrying operations in his property.

(iii) to issue an appropriate writ or order directing respondent No.1 to 4 to examine and assess the degradation and damage to the property of the petitioners and as well as to the environment and ground water resources caused by the quarrying and assess and recover from the fifth respondent, the financial requirement for its restoration.

(iv) to issue an appropriate writ or order, directing respondent No.4 to fill up the huge pits caused by quarrying beyond the permitted limit and recover the costs from the fifth respondent."

2. The District Geologist, Ernakulam has filed a counter affidavit, contending that a quarrying permit was validly issued to the fifth respondent and that it is valid till 07-09-2009. It is also stated that there are no residential buildings, schools, roads or any other public structures located within 50 metres of the quarry. As regards the allegation that the depth of the quarry exceeds 150 feet, the District Geologist, Ernakulam has stated as follows:

" The depth of the quarry is subject to the provisions of sufficient benches and slopes at every 6 metres of vertical cuttings. The quarry in question is being operated on its safer quarry faces where the prescribed depth limit is not exceeded. During the personal inspection conducted by this respondent it is observed that no work is progressing on the vertical faces where the depth is exceeded by 6 metres."

The District Geologist, Ernakulam has also denied the allegation that the quarrying operation conducted by the fifth respondent is without obtaining the required permit and without complying with the provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules.

3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala State Pollution Control Board has filed a statement dated 18-06-2009. Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 thereof read as follows:-

" 2. It is submitted that the quarry is located in Parakkadavu Panchayat, Aluva Taluk, Ernakulam District owned by the fifth respondent. The quarry is functioning under valid consent of the Board up to 31-12-2009. A true copy of the consent is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R3(a).

3. It is submitted that the site was inspected by the Board Officers on 28-04- 2009. The nearby residences are beyond 50 metres. There are about 8 residences within 100 metres. The quarrying operations commenced bef