IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed the right to conduct lawful business and mandated police protection against unlawful obstruction.

JUDGMENT :

N. NAGARESH, J.

1. The petitioner took on lease certain land in Kuttamangalam Village, Kothamangalam Taluk in Ernakulam District for the purpose of conducting quarrying activities. The petitioner states that some persons including the party respondent are attempting to get rid of the petitioner in order to start the quarrying operations themselves. They allege that if quarrying operations are conducted by the petitioner, it would damage a water tank owned by the Kerala Water Authority. The tank is 145 metres away from the proposed quarry.

2. By Ext.P1 judgment in W.P.(C)No.25341/2020, this Court had directed to conduct a scientific study on the effect of quarrying operations on the said water tank. The Senior Geologist, as per Ext.P2 report, has stated that the proposed quarrying site is not vulnerable to landslides in and around. The Senior Geologist reported that the site condition is suitable for quarrying activities.

3. The petitioner paid requisite fee to the National Institute of Technology, Surathkal, Karnataka to conduct a scientific study in the proposed quarry area. On 02.07.2024, when the petitioner along with the inspection team of NIT, Surathkal approached the quarrying area, the 4^th respondent and his henchman prevented them from conducting any inspection. The technical team from NIT, Surathkal was not permitted to enter the premises. The petitioner was attacked by the 4^th respondent. The petitioner submitted Ext.P6 petition to the police. The police did not extend any help.

4. The petitioner states that the official respondents are duty bound to take action on the complaints preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner would face huge financial loss and hardship by the action of the 4^th respondent and his henchman. The petitioner therefore seeks to direct the respondents to give effective and adequate police protection to the petitioner and the scientific survey team of the 5^th respondent in conducting inspection of the proposed quarry site.

5. The 4^th respondent filed a counter affidavit.The 4^th respondent stated that no quarrying activities can be allowed in plantation land. The proposed enquiry site is a plantation land. A Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 451/2018 has held that quarrying operations using explosives within a radius of one kilometre of any bridge, dam, check dam or any other work, structure or construction, owned, controlled or maintained by the Government, a local authority or any other authority, without any prior written permission, is not permissible. The water tank maintained by the Kerala Water Authority would fall within the ambit of Section 40(2) of the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act, 2003.

6. The existing water tank is having a capacity of 2.5 lakhs litres. It is within hundred metre distance from the quarry site. Furthermore, a new water tank is now proposed which will be less than 50 metres away from the site. The vehicle traffic to and from the quarry would cause damage to the water pipes. The blasting operations would cause damage to the water tank. Therefore, the proposed quarry will be against the interest of the general public.

7. The 6^th respondent-Kerala Water Authority has filed a counter affidavit. The 6^th respondent stated that as per order in W.P.(C) No.25341 of 2020, a joint scientific study was conducted by the Geological Survey of India. As per the report, they recommended to construct a new water tank considering the age of the existing tank. At present, there is a tank of capacity 2.2 LL at Kottaramudy and was constructed about 20 years back. Water is supplied from this tank to four Wards of Pallarimangalam Panchayat and eight Wards of Kavalangad Panchayat. The people in the above two Panchayats are fully or partly depend Kerala Wa