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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 1451

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 
N.Nagaresh, J.
Mahroof Ali Thahir K.P – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By Secretary, Home Department and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) Nos.44783 of 2024 and 9014 of 2025 and Contempt of Court Case (C) No.331 of 2025
Decided On : 23-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Jamsheed Hafiz, T.S.Sreekutty, Fathima Nasreen S.
For the Respondent: Abhirami P.S., Anu Prabhakar, Haridas P.Nair, K.G.Manoj Kumar, K.L.Sreekala, Krishnadas P. Nair, M.Rajesh Kumar(R-160), Merlin Thomas, Prasoon.K.P, Swathykrishna K., Vishnu Prasad

Valid permits for quarrying activities cannot be obstructed by local residents without evidence of statutory violations.

Headnote:

(A) Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 - Rules 3(1) and 9 - Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 - Quarrying permit issued to the petitioner for laterite stone quarrying in Chekyad Village - Local residents obstructed operations, claiming environmental hazards - Court found no statutory violations by the petitioner and upheld the validity of permits. (Paras 1-11)

(B) Right to carry out permitted activities - Local residents have no right to obstruct quarrying activities when permits are valid and unchallenged. (Paras 10-11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner obtained necessary licenses for quarrying, but local residents obstructed operations, citing environmental concerns and alleged violations of permit conditions.

Findings of Court:
The court directed police protection for the petitioner to carry out quarrying as per valid permits, dismissing the residents' complaints.

Issues: The main issues were the validity of the quarrying permits and the rights of local residents to obstruct operations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that valid permits cannot be obstructed by local residents without evidence of statutory violations.

Result: W.P.

(C) No.44783/2024 is disposed of with directions for police protection; W.P.

(C) No.9014/2025 is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

N.Nagaresh, J.

W.P.(C) No.44783/2024 and Contempt of Court Case No.331/2025 have been filed by the petitioner who has obtained requisite licences for conducting laterite stone quarrying in Chekyad Village of Vatakara Taluk in Kozhikode District. W.P.(C) No.9014/2025 is filed by a resident of Chekyad area, aggrieved by the proposed quarrying activities. The parties and exhibits are referred to in this judgment as they are described and marked in W.P.(C) No.44783/2024, unless otherwise specified.

2. The petitioner states that he has obtained permission from the Department of Mining and Geology, Government of Kerala to conduct laterite stone quarrying in the 0.9714 Hectares of property comprised in Survey No.34/2 in Chekyad Village of Vatakara Taluk as per Ext.P1 quarrying permit. The State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Kerala has issued Environmental Clearance for the laterite as per Ext.P2.

3. After obtaining necessary permits, when the petitioner and his workers went to the proposed quarrying area, respondents 5 to 14 trespassed into the property and obstructed the operations. Respondents 5 to 14 are local residents. Respondents 5 to 14 are capable of causing harm to the petitioner and his workmen. The petitioner therefore filed Ext.P3 complaint before the 2nd respondent-District Police Chief on 05.12.2024. However, the police authorities refused to afford effective police protection. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to direct respondents 1 to 4 to give adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and his employees.

4. When this writ petition came up for admission, this Court passed an interim order dated 24.12.2024 directing the 3rd respondent-Circle Inspector of Police to afford sufficient and adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and his employees for carrying out quarrying operations strictly in accordance with the permission granted by the authorities.

5. The 14th respondent in W.P.(C) No.44783/2024 has filed W.P.(C) No.9014/2025 seeking to command the respondents to take necessary action to stop the quarrying activities of the petitioner. According to the 14th respondent, he has filed Ext.P3 complaint before the District Collector, the Environmental Engineer and the District Geologist against the improper quarrying and mining by the petitioner. Those complaints are not properly considered. The statutory authorities have to stop the illegal functioning of the quarry, causing hazard and danger to the life of the general public.

6. The 14th respondent urged that Chekyad and adjacent areas are environmentally sensitive and are prone to landslides and floods. The adverse environmental impact has been ignored while granting permit to the petitioner. The entire population in Chekyad area are aggrieved by and agitated against the quarrying activities of the petitioner. This is evident from large number of newspaper reports.

7. The 14th respondent further argued that environmental clearance has been given subject to specific conditions as contained in Ext.P2. The petitioner has violated most of the conditions as contained in Ext.P2. The statutory authorities are therefore compellable to interfere in the matter and stop quarrying activities by the petitioner.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 to 14. I have also heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Pollution Control Board, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for SEIAA and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the State of Kerala.

9. It is evident from Ext.P1 that the petitioner has been granted quarrying permit on 29.11.2024 by the District Geologist as per Ext.P1. The quarrying permit has been issued under Rules 3(1) and 9 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules , 2015. Ext.P1 is valid till 28.11.2025. The quantity of extraction of mineral permitted is indicated in Ext.P1.

10. The SEIAA has granted

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