Important points:
The risk of harm to environment or health, has to be decided by the Government in public interest and, in the above circumstances, though the power of the Government in framing the guidelines for grant of quarrying permit is not questioned, still, when the Government have taken up the task of framing guidelines for the abovesaid purpose and, in the meanwhile, directed the District Collectors to withhold consideration of the applications for grant of NOC, the same requires to be considered.

JUDGMENT :

S. Manikumar, J.

Instant writ appeal is filed challenging the judgment in W. P. (C) No. 18137 of 2020 dated 15.09.2020, whereby a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition holding that the decision of the District Collector, respondent No.3, to withhold the application preferred by the petitioner for grant of No Objection Certificate (NOC) until guidelines are formulated by the Government, cannot be said to be illegal in any manner.

2. Facts leading to the filing of instant appeal are that appellant/writ petitioner is the absolute owner and in possession of the property covered by Exhibit-P1 title deed. On the eastern boundary of the said property, there is a Government puramboke land. She, therefore, submitted Exhibit-P2 application dated 25.01.2019 before the District Collector, Thrissur, respondent No.3, for issuance of NOC to conduct quarrying operations in the Government puramboke land, for which, Exhibit-P3 receipt was issued. On the basis of Exhibit-P6 communication of the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Thiruvananthapuram, dated 18.01.2020, and further intimation of the 2nd respondent, the District Collector, has rejected the application of the appellant stating that grant of NOC for quarrying could be considered only after preparing the guidelines for issuance of NOC and after getting approval. It is the case of the appellant that her application dated 25.01.2019 was rejected on the basis of a Government order issued on 12.12.2019 and that the rules applicable at that point of time ought to have been followed in her case. Appellant has also contended that her application is submitted prior to the said Government Order.

3. Based on the above pleadings, appellant has filed the writ petition for the following reliefs:-

(i) To issue writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent, to take up Exhibit-P2 application submitted by the petitioner dated 25.01.2019 for issuance of NOC to carryout quarrying operations in the Government land, taking note of the fact that her application is submitted prior to the Government order dated 12.12.2019 cited in Exhibit-P6 letter of the Principal Secretary dated 18.01.2020, and to conclude the proceedings, within a time limit fixed by this Court, in the interest of justice.

(ii) To declare that the petitioner's case need not be considered as a fresh matter, since it is evident from Exhibit-P2 application and Exhibit-P3 receipt that the same is much prior to the issuance of the Government order dated 12.12.2019.”

4. Writ court, after considering the pleadings, relevant provisions, and the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited therein, dismissed the writ petition by the impugned judgment, as stated above. Being aggrieved, writ petitioner/appellant has filed this appeal on the following grounds:-

“A) It is evident that the application submitted by the appellant before the 3rd respondent, District Collector is dated 25.01.2019. The application was forwarded to the subordinate revenue officers for report and further action. Her case was that prior to the Government letter dated 12.12.2019 the application is pending. Hence, interference of this Court is necessary in the matter.

(B) The reason for rejection of her application for grant of No Objection Certificate by the 3rd respondent was that guidelines have not yet been formulated by the Government. While disposing of the case, the stand of the Government and Revenue Department has to be ascertained. Writ court, without even calling for any report or without asking for any statement or affidavit from the Government, has decided the matter in an illegal and arbitrary manner.

(C) There is no doubt that while distributing the mineral wealth belonging to the State, transparent and effective methods have to be formulated. To the knowledge of the appellant, a large num