IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
RAJESH K – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, THRISSUR DISTRICT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner possesses land for agricultural use. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding the application of rules. (Para 2 , 3) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 18th day of June, 2024 Petitioner is the owner in possession of landed property having an extent of 51.19 Ares. The petitioner stands in need of digging a pond therein for agricultural activities. The same involves extraction of granite. According to the petitioner, the granite is intended to be used for constructing the boundary walls of the pond. At any rate, the same is not required to be transported outside the premises. According to the petitioner, his activity will fall under Rule 106 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules , 2015, which only speaks of an intimation to the competent authority. However, a stop memo has been issued, vide Ext.P4 treating the activity as one coming within Rule 104 of the Rules afore referred. The short issue, which falls for consideration is whether Rule 104 or 106 applies to the fact situation herein.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.