SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ker) 851

IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
T.P. Abdul Basheer, S/o. Ebrahimkutty - Petitioner
Versus
Cherupuzha Grama Panchayat, Represented by Its Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 9356 of 2021
Decided On : 16-09-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For Petitioner: S. Sreekumar (Sr.), Sri. O.V. Maniprasad, Sri. P. Martin Jose.
For Respondents: Sri. K.N. Abhilash, Sri. Sunil Nair Palakkat, Sri. M. Sasindran, Sri. M.M. Ramesh Chander (Sr.), Smt. K.A. Sanjeetha, Sri. Balu Tom.

Point of law : Environmental Clearance Certificates issued by DEIAA prior to judgment of National Green Tribunal order are valid as long as they are not subjected to successful challenge.

Headnote:

KERALA Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - Sections 233, 232 and 239 - Power of Panchayat for carrying out their functions - Grant of permission to establish quarry - issued Mining Lease - Petitioner is owner of 6.35 Acres of land in Re-Survey of Vayakkara Village - Petitioner’s brother is holding 9.90 Acres of land in same Survey number, which is lying contiguously - Geologist approved Mining Plan Director of Mining and Geology issued Mining Lease - Period of Quarrying lease - District Environment Impact Assessment Authority issued Ext.P4 Environmental Clearance (EC). Pollution Control Board issued Ext.P5 Integrated Consent - PCB has granted Ext.P6 Consent to Crusher Unit. 2nd respondent-Secretary to Panchayat has granted Ext.P7 Licence Crusher Unit. - 1st respondent-Panchayat has considered application filed under Section 233 of Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 for grant of permission to establish quarry. Panchayat decided to grant permission and Secretary issued Ext.P8 Licence dated 18.01.2019. validity of Ext.P8 should statutorily be for 5 years - Respondents 1 and 2 did not communicate any orders within 30 days and hence petitioner had Deemed Licence renewal. petitioner therefore applied for licence in physical form, which was not readily issued - When petitioner filed W.P. respondents issued a licence dated 01.07.2019, with validity - petitioner should be treated as having Deemed Licence - In order to obtain Movement Permit from Geology Department, petitioner applied for Licence in paper form –

Finding of the court : Reason projected by Panchayat is adverse environmental impact and pollution. - Petitioner has been issued EC for conducting quarrying operations. Pollution Control Board has issued Consent to Establish. When competent statutory bodies having expertise in field of environmental protection and pollution have granted permission based on requisite studies, Panchayat authorities cannot, without any reliable materials, stop functioning of units based on public complaints alone - functions entrusted to Panchayats by or under this Act or any other law - But, exercise of such powers are circumscribed by Rules made under Act - Court is of considered view that Ext.P18 communication cannot be legally sustained. Ext.P18 is therefore set aside. Consequently, there will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to take up Ext.P15 and Ext.P16 applications of petitioner and renew licences issued to Quarry and Crusher Unit notwithstanding decisions –

Result : Ordered Accordingly

JUDGMENT :

petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by illegal rejection of his application for renewal of Trade Licence for functioning Quarry and Crusher Unit, by respondents 1 and 2.

2. petitioner is owner of 6.35 Acres of land in Re-Survey No.431 of Vayakkara Village of Payyannur Taluk. petitioner’s brother is holding 9.90 Acres of land in same Survey number, which is lying contiguously. petitioner wanted to conduct a quarry in said land. Geologist approved Mining Plan as per Ext.P1. By Ext.P2, Director of Mining and Geology issued Mining Lease. period of Quarrying lease is up to 23.01.2030. Geologist has issued Movement Permit. Additional District Magistrate issued Ext.P3 Explosives Licence. District Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA) issued Ext.P4 Environmental Clearance (EC). Pollution Control Board (PCB) issued Ext.P5 Integrated Consent.

3. petitioner has also started a stone Crusher Unit. Geologist has granted registration to unit. PCB has granted Ext.P6 Consent to Crusher Unit. 2nd respondent-Secretary to Panchayat has granted Ext.P7 Licence to Crusher Unit. 1st respondent-Panchayat has considered application filed under Section 233 of Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 for grant of permission to establish quarry. Panchayat decided to grant permission and Secretary issued Ext.P8 Licence dated 18.01.2019. validity of Ext.P8 should statutorily be for 5 years. But, in Ext.P8, licence period was recorded as up to 31.03.2019 only. petitioner submitted application for renewal of Ext.P8 on 26.02.2019.

4. Respondents 1 and 2 did not communicate any orders within 30 days and hence petitioner had Deemed Licence renewal. petitioner therefore applied for licence in physical form, which was not readily issued. When petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.13784/2019, respondents issued a licence dated 01.07.2019, with validity up to 31.03.2020. Before expiry of said period, on 27.02.2020, petitioner applied for renewal of licences of quarry and crusher unit. No action was taken thereon within 30 days and petitioner should be treated as having Deemed Licence. In order to obtain Movement Permit from Geology Department, petitioner applied for Licence in paper form, which was not granted.

5. petitioner hence filed W.P.(C) No.11736/2020. By Ext.P9 judgment, this Court directed Secretary to take up applications submitted by petitioner and pass orders. Directions in Ext.P9 were not complied with and hence petitioner filed Contempt of Court Case No.960/2020. Thereupon, respondents filed R.P. No.482/2020. On basis of an undertaking given by respondents, Contempt of Court Case was closed and Review Petition was dismissed. Thereafter, Ext.P12 licence dated 20.08.2020 was issued, validity of which was extended up to 31.03.2021.

6. petitioner states that 3rd respondent filed W.P.(C) No.11133/2020 challenging EC issued by DEIAA and Quarrying Lease issued by Director of Mining and Geology and also Movement Permit issued by District Geologist. This Court passed an interim order on 09.06.2020, ordering status quo. Influenced by said interim order, 2nd respondent-Secretary issued Ext.P13 Stop Memo against quarrying operations by petitioner, on 07.10.2020. petitioner submits that said Ext.P13 Stop Memo is illegal. petitioner hence filed W.P.(C) No.21536/2020. This Court stayed operation of Ext.P13 Stop Memo on 20.10.2020. W.P.(C) Nos.11133/2020 and 21536/2020 were heard together. This Court quashed Ext.P13 Stop Memo and dismissed WP(C) No.11133/2020 as per Ext.P14 common judgment.

7. petitioner thereafter made application for renewal of Ext.P12 Quarry Licence and Ext.P7 Crusher Unit licence, as per Exts.P15 and P16. 2nd respondent has not considered renewal application. petitioner therefore filed W.P.(C) No.7190/2021. On 30.03.2021, Court was informed that applications for renewal of Licences are rejected by 2nd respondent on basis of a resolution passed by 1st respondent-Panchayat.

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top