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

2024 Supreme(Ker) 619

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
Satheesh Joseph, S/o. K.V. Joseph - Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by the Secretary, Department of Industries, Secretariat & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 14619 of 2024
Decided On : 26-06-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: K.C. Vincent.
For the Respondent: Ajith Viswanathan - Government Pleader, Tom Jose (Padinjarekara) - Standing Counsel.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, contemplates construction of buildings and is not confined to construction and digging of foundations for buildings.

Headnote:

Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules - Construction - Rule 14(2)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought movement permit and transit passes for constructing six residential villas on a property. The rejection of the application was based on an interpretation of Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, stating that the exemption granted applies only to digging of foundation of buildings, not for construction of buildings.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the interpretation of Rule 14(2) was erroneous and misconstrued, as the rule contemplates construction of buildings and is not confined to construction and digging of foundations for buildings.

Issues: Interpretation of Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the plain literal meaning of the language employed in Rule 14(2) and the amended provision indicate that the rule contemplates construction of buildings and is not confined to construction and digging of foundations for buildings.

Final Decision: The Writ Petition was allowed, and the rejection of the petitioner's application was set aside. The 2nd respondent/Geologist was directed to issue movement permit and transit passes to the petitioner within two weeks, provided the application is in accord with the requirements under Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015.

JUDGMENT :

Petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P11 order of the 2nd respondent/Geologist, which rejected petitioner's application for issuance of movement permit and transit passes. The rejection was premised on an interpretation to Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 (for short 'K.M.M.C. Rules') to the effect that the exemption granted therein applies only to digging of foundation of buildings; and not for construction of building, as such. On such interpretation, the petitioner was required to produce environmental clearance, vide Ext.P11.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner wants to construct six residential villas in the subject property having an extent of one hectare. Harping upon Rule 14(2) of the K.M.M.C. Rules, petitioner applied for movement permit and transit passes, on the premise that, no quarrying permit is required. Learned counsel would submit that, the language employed in Rule 14(2) is “extraction of ordinary earth in connection with the construction and digging of foundation for building that do not require environmental clearance”, which necessarily means that extraction of ordinary earth for the purpose of construction of the building also does not require any quarrying permit, provided the building does not require any environmental clearance. Learned counsel then invited the attention of this Court to the Schedule to E.I.A. notification, 2006, particularly to Clause 8(a), which deals with building and construction projects, to point out that, such building or projects where the total built up area is less than 50000 sq. mts. does not require any environmental clearance. Learned counsel would hasten to add that, the requirement of 50000 has since then been amended to 20000 sq. mts. It is the specific case of the petitioner, which finds recognition in Ext.P11 impugned order, that the total built up area of all the six buildings of the petitioner is less than 12500 sq.mts, wherefore, no environmental clearance is required. In such circumstances, the rejection of petitioner's application for movement permit and transit passes, vide Ext.P11, is illegal, is the submission made by the learned counsel. Learned counsel would also clarify that, the application for movement permit and transit passes was initially rejected vide Ext.P7, against which, the petitioner preferred a review vide Ext.P8. Ext.P11 order rejected the review petition. Learned counsel would also submit that, the interpretation sought to be assigned to Rule 14(2), that it applies only to digging of foundation of building is erroneous and misconstrued. Learned counsel would invite the attention of this Court to requirements in amended provision of Rule 14(2) which speaks of plinth area of the ground floor, the open space of the building, dimensioned plan and sectional drawing etc., which would only indicate that Rule 14(2) takes within its sweep construction of building; and not confined to construction of foundation for buildings.

4. Per contra, these submissions were refuted by the learned Government Pleader. Learned Government Pleader would submit so as to sustain Ext.P11 order of the District Geologist.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds considerable force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Rule 14 of the K.M.M.C. Rules is extracted here below :

    “14. Quarrying Permit for Ordinary earth –

(1) A quarrying permit under these rules shall be obtained for extraction [and transportation] of ordinary earth used for filling or levelling purposes in construction of embankments, roads, railways or building in Form N:

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), no quarrying permit is required under these rules for the extraction of ordinary earth in connection with the constructi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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