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

2023 Supreme(Ker) 425

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J.
Sinoj Thomas, S/o. Thomas - Petitioner
Versus
Balal Grama Panchayat, Represented by the Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 11840 of 2023
Decided On : 05-07-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Philip J. Vettickattu, Sajitha George, Neenu Bernath.
For the Respondent: K. Seena.

Point of Law : Panchayat institutions can exercise only those powers conferred on and vested with them by legislature.

Headnote:

Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 - Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - Sections 232 and 233 - Amendment Act, 14 of 2018 - Gram Panchayat - Conducting quarrying operations - Petitioner aggrieved by Ext.P12 decision and seeking to direct 1st respondent-Grama Panchayat to issue permission to petitioner for conducting quarrying operations forthwith - Citizens who opt for start ups and entrepreneurships should be able to rely on decisions and clearances given by specialised statutory bodies and go ahead with their projects - Para 22.

Finding of the Court :

Panchayats cannot act as if they are protectors and enforcers of all public interests and exercise powers not vested with them - Section 233 of Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, power of Panchayat is laid down in Act with clarity - Citizens who opt for start ups and entrepreneurships should be able to rely on decisions and clearances given by specialised statutory bodies and go ahead with their projects - Local Self Government Institutions cannot take a view different from views of other statutory bodies and stop or create hurdles for entrepreneurs in going ahead with projects which are permitted under laws - Ext.P12 decision of 1st respondent-Panchayat is set aside - In view of eligibility of petitioner noted in Ext.P12, 1st respondent is directed to issue permission to petitioner within a period of one month to conduct quarrying operations based on licences, clearances and consents obtained by petitioner.

Result : Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner, who is a grantee of Letter of Intent for establishing a Quarrying Unit in Maloth Village, Vellarikkundu Taluk in Kasaragod District, has filed this writ petition aggrieved by Ext.P12 decision and seeking to direct the 1st respondent-Grama Panchayat to issue permission to the petitioner for conducting quarrying operations forthwith.

2. The petitioner holds 2.3310 hectares of land comprised in Survey No.193 of Maloth Village, Vellarikkundu Taluk in Kasaragod District. The Director of Mining and Geology issued Ext.P1 Letter of Intent dated 19.09.2017 to the petitioner for Quarrying Lease under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015. The petitioner submitted application to the competent authority and the Geologist approved Ext.P2 Mining Plan for Granite building stone Quarry, to the petitioner.

3. The petitioner applied for Environmental Clearance. The District Environmental Impact Assessment Authority, Kasaragod granted Environmental Clearance to the petitioner on 25.04.2018. The petitioner would submit that the validity of the said Environmental Clearance is still current in view of the notifications issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The Pollution Control Board also issued to the petitioner Ext.P6 Consent to Operate. The Joint Chief Controller of Explosives granted the petitioner Ext.P7 Explosives Licence.

4. To start the quarrying operations, the petitioner further required permission/licence of the Panchayat authorities under Sections 232 and 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P9 application on 17.02.2023. The petitioner remitted the required licence fee. But, the Secretary to the Panchayat returned the licence fee and intimated that the fees may be remitted upon getting further instructions from the Panchayat.

5. To the surprise and predicament of the petitioner, the application submitted by the petitioner for permission to establish Quarry was dismissed by the 1st respondent-Panchayat as per its decision dated 24.03.2023. The decision to not grant permission to the petitioner was on the basis of a decision of the Panchayat that a new Quarry need not be permitted in the Panchayat area.

6. The petitioner submits that he was not granted an opportunity of being heard before the Panchayat taking the decision adverse to the petitioner. The petitioner would further submit that in view of the amendment effected to Section 233 of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the Panchayat does not have jurisdiction, authority, power or right/discretion to refuse/reject an application for permission. The reason for which the application of the petitioner has been rejected is unsustainable in law, contended the petitioner.

7. Respondents 1 and 2 resisted the writ petition filing counter affidavit. Various objections and complaints were received by the Panchayat authorities from the general public stating that the petitioner has not obtained NOC from the Environmental Impact Assessment Authority. One Rijosh M.J., representing Chamathatta Samrakshana Samithi, submitted a complaint against the proposed Quarry. The complainants were heard. A clarification was sought for from the District Collector as to whether the NOC from the Environmental Impact Assessment Authority and Explosives Licence are still in force.

8. The District Collector has not so far given any reply to the letter sent by the Panchayat. The writ petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties, urged the respondents. The Panchayat Committee decided on 24.03.2023 to reject the application of the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore devoid of any merit and it is only to be dismissed, contended the respondents.

9. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

10. The petitioner proposed to start a quarrying unit in 2.3310 hectares of land in Maloth Village. The petitioner was issued with Ext.P1 Letter of Intent by the Di

    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