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

2023 Supreme(Ker) 290

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
Mohandas P.D. S/o Late Divakaran – Petitioner
Versus
The District Geologist, Thrissur – Respondent
W.P. (C) Nos. 34257, 35502, 36460, 37996 of 2022
Decided On : 02-05-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Binoy Vasudevan.
For the Respondent: T.P. Sajan.

Point of Law: Rule 3 of Special Rules, 1993 provides that lands under Rules may be assigned on Registry for purpose of personal cultivation or for house sites or for shop sites as case may be.

Headnote:

Kerala Land Assignment Special Rules, 1993 - Rule 9(3), 3 - Forest Conservation Act, 1980 - Section 2 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 162 - Kerala Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015 - Assigned land - Possession Certificate - Whether petitioners are behind soil mafia group, which sells illegally excavated soil in patta and other land areas - Rule 3 of Special Rules, 1993 provides that lands under Rules may be assigned on Registry for purpose of personal cultivation or for house sites or for shop sites as case may be.

Findings of the Court:

It has to be concluded that the omission on the part of the District Geologist in considering the applications of the petitioners for issuance of Mineral Transit Passes for transportation of ordinary earth is illegal and arbitrary. The District Geologist is duty bound to consider the statutory applications for issuance of Mineral Transit Passes submitted by the petitioners without awaiting for any permission or approval from Range Forest Officer.

Result: Writ Petitions disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

N. NAGARESH, J.

1. These writ petitions raise a common question of law almost on similar facts. Hence, they are heard together and disposed of by a common judgment.

2. For convenience, facts of the case in W.P. (C) No. 34257 of 2022 are narrated here. Facts in other cases are almost identical. The petitioner is in ownership and possession of 0.297 Hectares of land situated in Peechi Village of Thrissur Taluk. The petitioner wanted to construct a residential building on the property. The Grama Panchayat, after verification, granted Ext.P3 Building Permit.

3. For the purpose of construction, ordinary earth has to be removed from the property. The Building Plan approved by the Panchayat indicated the quantity of ordinary earth to be removed for facilitating the construction. The ordinary earth so removed is to be transported out. Ordinary earth being a minor mineral, the petitioner requires Mineral Transit Passes to be issued by the 1st respondent-District Geologist.

4. The District Geologist, instead of issuing Mineral Transit Passes, issued Ext.P5 letter dated 23.02.2022 to the Range Forest Officer asking for his opinion as to whether the land of the petitioner being originally one assigned under the Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands Prior to 01.01.1977) Special Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as “the Special Rules 1993” for brevity) and since the Possession Certificate also indicated that it is an ‘assigned land’ can permission be granted to remove and transport out earth from the land for construction of residential building.

5. According to the petitioner, the Forest Range Officer did not respond to the communication sent by the District Geologist and the District Geologist is refusing to issue Mineral Transit Passes without the concurrence of the Forest Range Officer. According to the petitioner, the District Geologist, in issuing Mineral Transit Passes, is exercising a statutory power and cannot exercise that power based on the opinion of the Forest Range Officer. The petitioner would argue that this Court, in Exts.P7 to P9 judgments, has held that ordinary earth can be permitted to be removed and transported for the purpose of construction of residential houses.

6. The Special Government Pleader (Forests) resisted the writ petitions filing Statements/Counter Affidavits. On behalf of the Range Forest Officer, it is submitted that the assignment of the forest land is made under Rule 9(3) of Kerala Land Assignment Rules (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands Prior to 01.01.1977) Special Rule 1993. The land was formerly part of Paravattanimala Notified Reserve. As per Rule 3 of the rules the purpose of assignment is for personal cultivation, house construction or shop room construction. So the land cannot be used for any other purpose. The petitioner is entitled to construct building in the property but under the guise of house construction, the soil of the forest land cannot be removed from the said land. The petitioner obtained the aforesaid land falling under Survey Number.3385/P of Peechi Village through a partition deed among his siblings and registered as Document No. 1949 of 2014 of S.R.O. Ollukkara dated 20.05.2014. The land was formerly forest land and it was actually assigned as part of regularization of the occupation of forest land. The petitioner has not submitted any application before the Divisional Forest Officer, Thrissur or any other subordinate forest officers for the removal of earth from his forest assigned land.

7. The petitioner’s forest assigned land is located at the right side of Poolachodu-Mayilattumpara Road. This land is situated in 2 meters height from the road. The land is just 200 meters away from Mayilatumpara forest area of Paravattanimala Notified Reserve. Soil excavation from the land would affect climatic and edaphic factors of the area. The Patta of the land attached by the petitioner as Ext.P6 with the petition is the same as the Patta

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top