Violation of permit conditions and failure to renew results in dismissal of the writ petition.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner was granted Ext.P3 quarrying permit for excavation of 8064m³ of ordinary earth during the period from 6/11/2023 to 5/2/2024. The petitioner paid Rs.3,22,560/- as royalty, vide Ext.P2 receipt. Ext.P5 is a demand notice issued to the petitioner alleging excess excavation of earth, and demanding a penalty of Rs.3,36,000/-. Petitioner preferred an appeal, which is disposed of vide Ext.P7, allowing payment of the penalty in six equal installments. Ext.P7 further directed the 3^rd respondent to grant permission to remove the remaining ordinary earth, upon payment of the 1^st installment. Petitioner remitted the 1^st installment of Rs.56,000/- on time vide Ext.P8, and thereafter, gave Ext.P9 application for renewal of quarrying permit, and for issuance of transit pass. However, the 3^rd respondent is compelling the petitioner to pay all the installments as per Ext.P7, as a pre-condition for renewal of permit and for issuance of pass, is the grievance espoused.

2. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the 1^st installment was paid on time. However, at that point of time, the petitioner failed to make an application for renewal. Such application for renewal has not been filed so far. Learned Government Pleader would submit that Ext.P9 is not the application to be submitted; instead, the application has to be submitted in the prescribed form, which has not been done. It was further pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that going by the directions in Ext.P7 appellate Order, the period fixed for payment of all the installments have expired, and the petitioner has not paid any installment, except the

1^st installment.

3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds no merit in the instant Writ Petition. The petitioner would highlight that part of Ext.P8 Order, which directs the 3^rd respondent to grant permission to remove the ordinary earth, upon payment of the 1^st installment.

4. Though the 1^st installment was remitted, this Court notice that the further installments have been defaulted. Ext.P7 also simultaneously directs that the 3^rd respondent has to ensure the payment of further installments. The direction has been violated. Further installments have not been paid. That apart, even at the time of making the payment of the 1^st installment, the petitioner had not filed necessary application in the prescribed form for renewal of permit, as also, for issuance of transit pass.

5. Having regard to attendant facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the discretion in terms of Article 226 of the Constitution is not liable to be exercised in favour of the petitioner. This Court primarily takes stock of the fact that the petitioner had illegally excavated land in excess of the quantity, than what is permitted, and had attorned to Ext.P7 Order, which dismissed the petitioner’s appeal, but granting installments for payment of penalty. Therefore, in addition to the initial illegal act, the petitioner has also failed to take the benefit of Ext.P7 Order. One part of Ext.P7 Order, which directs consideration of petitioner’s request upon effecting payment of 1^st installment cannot be read in isolation and taken advantage of, inasmuch as, Ext.P7 also warrants ensuring the payment of the remaining installments as well.

This Writ Petition is meritless, and the same will stand dismissed.

Sd/-