Point of Law : Rule 10 of Trade Rules reads as renewal of Licence.

JUDGMENT :

Petitioner prays for a declaration that he is entitled to have his license renewed by the Panchayat under Rule 10 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Factories, Trades, Entrepreneurship Activities and Other Services) Rules, 1996. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondent to issue a certificate of renewal of license.

2. With the intention of commencing quarrying operations, petitioner initiated steps to obtain licenses and permissions from various statutory authorities. The Geologist issued a letter of intent on 10.05.2018 expressing that a quarrying permit can be issued to the Petitioner to extract granite building stones from an area of 99.41 ares in resurvey No. 85/2, 86/1 and 86/2 of Keralasseri Village of Palakkad Taluk, provided he obtains various licenses and permissions mentioned therein. Pursuant thereto, petitioner obtained an Environmental Clearance, followed by a license under the Explosives Act, apart from consent to operate the quarry from the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. Later, the Panchayat also issued a license to the petitioners for the period from 11.01.2023 to 31.03.2023 to conduct the quarry.

3. On obtaining all the licenses, petitioner deposited the royalty payable, and thus, steps for issuing the quarrying permit also reached its final stages. On noticing that license already issued by the Panchayat was expiring, petitioner applied for its renewal on 15.03.2023. Though the respondent Panchayat was bound to take a decision within 30 days, until 30.5.2023, there was no communication from the respondents. Petitioner hence proceeded on the assumption that he had obtained a deemed license under section 236(3) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1994, (for short ‘the Act’). In the meantime, a communication dated 30.5.2023 was served on the petitioner stating that Panchayat had held a meeting with the petitioner and the locals to allay the fears of the public. The communication further stated that despite the meeting, the local people remained disquieted, and hence, it was decided to conduct a joint inspection with the Pollution Control Board and the Mining and Geology Department. It was also informed that the application for license would be considered only after the report of joint inspection. According to the petitioner, renewal of the license is a right under Rule 10 of the Rules, and hence, the joint inspection proposed cannot be a means to delay the issuance of the renewed license.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent, pointing out that though petitioner has obtained all the licenses and permissions from various statutory authorities since there are complaints from the local residents, the Panchayat cannot ignore those grievances. It was further stated that the joint inspection is required to ward off the apprehensions of the local residents and to recommend remedial measures and that an appropriate decision would be taken by the Panchayat after the joint inspection is conducted. The respondent has also pointed out that the nearest residence from the quarrying site is only 50 meters away, and therefore, the distance of 200 meters specified by the National Green Tribunal in O.A No. 304/2019 will apply.

5. I have heard Sri. Philip J. Vettickattu learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri. U. Balagangadharan, the learned counsel for the respondent.

6. Admittedly, the petitioner was granted a license to conduct a quarry for the period from 11.01.2023 to 31.3.2023. Before the expiry of the license, petitioner had applied for its renewal on 15.03.2023, as evident from Exhibit P7, and even remitted the fee. The respondents were bound to take a decision on the said application within 30 days, but, such a decision was not taken. Neither has any communication been issued rejecting the application, nor did the Panchayat point out any defect in the application for renewal. The failure to respond within 30 days of the application has conferred a right to