The above writ petitions were heard together on the question of how the provision for compounding has to be applied as provided in the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 [for brevity "MMDR Act"]; and Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 [for brevity "KMMC Rules of 2015"] and the Kerala Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015 [for brevity "Transportation Rules"]; the Rules having come into force on 07.02.2015. Earlier the provisions applicable were that of the Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 (Kerala) [for brevity "KMMC Rules of 1967], which provisions came up for consideration before this Court twice, which instances shall be referred to in the course of the judgment.

2. At the outset, it has to be noticed that all the writ petitions have been filed by the registered owners of 'Goods vehicles' and 'JCB Excavators', claiming that their vehicles were intercepted and seized in pursuance of an allegation of commission of offence under the MMDR Act read with the KMMC Rules of 2015 and Transportation Rules of 2015. On going through the various writ petitions, this Court discerns a substantial difference between certain cases. The majority of the cases, as had been claimed by the petitioners, related to interception and seizure of Goods vehicles carrying either ordinary earth, laterite stone, M.Sand, granite stone or gravel. They are termed the first batch of cases. But, however, certain writ petitions are with respect to interception of vehicles at the spot at which excavations were detected. Such interceptions were not of Goods vehicles alone, but also JCBs. The same are treated differently as the second batch; though the issue is considered at one go. Yet another group of cases disclose allegations of levelling of land, which cannot be confined to an allegation of an offence under the MMDR Act and the Rules of 2015. This third batch of cases could also raise questions under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 [for brevity "Paddy Land Act"].

3. The essential issue urged is the claim of the petitioners to seek compounding of the offence. There is no dispute that, but for the difference noticed herein-above, the various types of goods carried in the vehicles and intercepted and seized by the authorities are goods coming under the definition of "minor minerals".

4. The penalty provided under the MMDR Act is under Section 21, which is extracted hereunder:

"S.21. Penalties.- (1) Whoever contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) of section 4 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees per hectare of the area.

(2) Any rule made under any provision of this Act may provide that any contravention thereof shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees, or with both, and in the case of a continuing contravention, with an additional fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees for every day during which such contravention continues after conviction for the first such contravention.

(3) Where any person trespasses into any land in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 4, such trespasser may be served with an order of eviction by the State Government or any authority authorised in this behalf by that Government and the State Government or such authorised authority may, if necessary, obtain the help of the police to evict the trespasser from the land.

(4) Whenever any person raises, transports or causes to e raised or transported, without any lawful authority, any mineral from any land, and, for that purpose, uses any tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing, such mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing shall be liable to be seized by an officer or authority specially empowered in this behalf.

(4A) Any mineral, tool,