The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of Panchayats to grant permissions and licenses in accordance with relevant legal provisions, and the requirement for expert opinions in cases where objections are raised by the Panchayats.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner, a Company in the business of quarrying minerals, has approached this Court challenging Ext.P8 and seeking to direct the respondents to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 application submitted for conducting quarrying operations under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, in the light of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Tomy Thomas v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (4) KHC 553] and other licences, permits and consents issued to the petitioner by statutory authorities.

2. The petitioner applied to the Director of Mining and Geology seeking quarrying lease for extracting granite building stone from land in Re-survey No.242 of Valayam Village of Vadakara Taluk in Kozhikode District. The Director issued Ext.P1 Letter of Intent. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change granted Ext.P2 Environmental Clearance. The Kerala State Pollution Control Board issued Ext.P3 Consent to Operate. The Additional District Magistrate gave Ext.P4 NOC under Rules 102 and 103 of the Explosive Rules, 2008. The Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO) issued Ext.P5 Explosives Licence in Form LE-3. By Ext.P6 communication, the District Geologist approved the Mining Plan.

3. The petitioner, as per Ext.P7 dated 20.02.2021, applied to the 2nd respondent-Secretary to Grama Panchayat, for issuance of Trade Licence to conduct quarrying operation. The 2nd respondent sent Ext.P8 communication dated 05.03.2021 to the petitioner stating that the petitioner needs to obtain an approval from the District Disaster Management Authority (DDMA). The petitioner states that Ext.P8 is highly arbitrary and illegal and goes against the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Tomy Thomas (supra). There is no legal justification for the 2nd respondent to delay or deny Trade Licence to the petitioner.

4. Respondents 1 and 2 filed a counter affidavit contesting the claims of the petitioner. Respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the order impugned is appealable under Section 276 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and hence this writ petition is premature. Licence has yet not been denied to the petitioner. The respondents have only required the petitioner to obtain concurrence of the DDMA to rule out any possibility of disaster apprehended. The direction contained in Ext.P8 is strictly in accordance with the judgment of this Court in Tomy Thomas (supra) and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, contended the respondents.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

6. The petitioner has obtained requisite licences/clearances/permissions/NOCs from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Kerala State Pollution Control Board, the Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation, the District Geologist and the Director of Mining and Geology. However, the application submitted by the petitioner to the respondents-Panchayat Authorities for issuance of Trade Licence has not been granted insisting that for grant of Trade Licence, the petitioner shall produce approval of the District Disaster Management Authority.

7. A Full Bench of this Court has held in the judgment in Tomy Thomas (supra) that under the amended provisions of sub-section 3 of Section 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (as amended by Act 14 of 2018), it cannot be said that Village Panchayats have got primacy of power to take an independent decision to reject the applications for permission/licence under the provisions of the Act and the licensing rules, for construction or for establishment of any factory, workshop or workplace. On the other hand, the Grama Panchayats are obliged to grant omissions in cases where the authorities mentioned under Section 233 of the Act had issued such permissions or concerns or 'No Objection Certificate'. Legal position has been changed by virtue of the amendments as mentioned above and the Village Panchayats do not enjoy any primacy of their