IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly, JJ.
G. Rajesh and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By Secretary To The Department Of Revenue And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) NO. 29702 of 2018
Decided On : 24-09-2021
Constitution of India ,1950 - Article 226 –Kerala Land Conservancy Rules 1958 - rule 11 - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872. - Section 114 (e ) - Kerala Land Conservancy Act - Sec 6(3) - Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1967. - - Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 -Rule 98 - Public interest litigation - Failure on the part of the State and its officials, namely respondents 1 to 6, to recover the amounts legally due from the 7th respondent, for the alleged illegal quarrying Whether any interference is required to orders passed by statutory authorities and whether there is any element of public interest involved in subject matter –
Finding of the Court : Petitioners ought to have produced requisite documents and records, so as to convince Court that there are factual errors or illegality in findings rendered by statutory authority, so as to secure any reliefs exercising power of discretion conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Moreover, when statutory authority has taken a decision rendering reasons, it has got a presumption valid under law by virtue of section 114 (e ) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Therefore burden of rebutting presumption, no doubt, is upon petitioners, and petitioners ought to have rebutted presumption available in law, so as to convince Court that interference is required to findings rendered by statutory authorities, at least by establishing a prima facie case, which petitioners have failed to do – Court are quite convinced and is of clear opinion that it was after understanding situation correctly from the records available with the Revenue authorities that the appellate authority has concluded that order passed by, in respect of an illegal quarrying conducted in was applied with provisions of Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 cannot be justified Court find that findings rendered by appellate authority are in accordance with law –
Result : Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Shaji P. Chaly, J.
This is a public interest litigation filed by the petitioners alleging that, on account of the failure on the part of the State and its officials, namely respondents 1 to 6, to recover the amounts legally due from the 7th respondent, for the alleged illegal quarrying carried out by the 7th respondent, in an extent of 5.47 acres of Government poramboke land in old survey No. 131E/1A/pt (new survey No. 240) of Puthucode Village, has caused substantial loss to the State.
2. The 1st petitioner claims that he is a public spirited person interested in ensuring Rule of Law in the country. The 2nd petitioner states that he lives adjacent to the property on which the quarrying activities were carried out and he is keen on championing the cause of the environment.
3. According to the petitioners, a total extent of 8.67 acres of land in the survey number specified above was declared as excess as per the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act and accordingly it became vested with the Government. Out of the said property, 5.47 acres of land was rocky area which was not fit for cultivation or assignment. Therefore, it was not assigned to any person but was reserved for public purposes.
4. The case projected by the petitioner is that the Tahsildar, Alathur, by a proceeding dated 13.09.2017 bearing No. KLC12/2012-13, imposed an amount of Rs. 28,53,160/-against the 7th respondent towards royalty, penalty and compensation, as provided under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, apart from seigniorage, based on the finding that the 7th respondent, namely M/s. Global Granites, Puthucode, Palakkad, had illegally quarried granite measuring 39,280 metric tonnes from an area of 88.50 cents of Government excess land lying in Survey No. 240, under the guise of a quarrying permit issued by the District Geologist, in respect of his property lying adjacent to the aforesaid property situated in resurvey Nos. 240, 241, block No. 32 of Puthucode Village, Alathur Taluk, Palakkad Village.
5. The levy was challenged by the 7th respondent by filing W. P. (C) No. 30364 of 2017 before this court wherein the Deputy Secretary, Department of Industries, was directed to consider any appeal filed under Rule 98 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, and to take a decision within two months from the date of filing of the appeal.
6. Accordingly, the 7th respondent filed an appeal dated 02.10.2017, wherein the 7th respondent took up a contention that the property in survey Nos. 240 and 241 has been in his ownership from 2008, and that quarrying was carried out on the permit issued by the District Geologist, which in turn was based on the sketch provided by the Village Officer, every year. The 7th respondent has also taken up a contention that he has not carried out any quarrying in the Government land situated in survey No. 240, adjoining his property. The sketch prepared by the Village Officer during the years were produced, wherein the area in which quarrying is permissible, was demarcated to support the contentions of the 7th respondent. The 7th respondent was heard on 05.12.2017 in the presence of District Geologist, Palakkad and Senior Geologist, Mining and Geology Directorate.
7. Ultimately, the appellate authority found that it is clear from the records that the illegal quarrying was taken note of by the Department of Revenue on 19.01.2013 in the Government land and a stop memo was issued by the Village Officer on 13.02.2013. The 7th respondent was heard in person by the Tahsildar (LR), Alathur, and he has submitted that the excavation from the excess land was not deliberate, as was stated in the proceedings dated 13.09.2017.
8. Thereupon the appellate authority found that as early as in 2013 itself, illegal quarrying was taken note of by the Revenue and stop memo was issued against quarrying in resurvey Nos. 240 block
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.