Kerala High Court
M/S. Vsc Villaments vs Aryanad Grama Panchayat on 12 June, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 1
2025:KER:41544
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
M/S. VSC VILLAMENTS
TC 54/928, ROHINI SADANAM, MELAMCODE, NEMOM P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER SRI. SREEJITH S.S., PIN - 695020
BY ADVS. SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
SRI.S.SREEDEV
SRI.RONY JOSE
SHRI.LEO LUKOSE
SRI.KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY
SHRI.DERICK MATHAI SAJI
SHRI.KARAN SCARIA ABRAHAM
SHRI.ITTOOP JOY THATTIL
RESPONDENTS:
1 ARYANAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT
ARYANAD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 695542
2 SECRETARY
ARYANAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, ARYANAD P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695542
BY ADV SHRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SC, ARYANAD GRAMA
PANCHAYAT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:41544
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2025 The writ petition is filed to declare that the petitioner has obtained a deemed trade licence under Section 236(3) the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short 'Act'), to operate a granite building stone quarry ('quarry', for brevity).
2. The petitioner proposes to start a quarry. Accordingly, after obtaining the licenses and permissions from the competent statutory authorities, the petitioner submitted an application for trade licence to the 2 nd respondent on 20.02.2025, as evidenced by Ext.P5 receipt. On 19.03.2025, the 2nd respondent issued a letter to the petitioner, directing them to produce certain additional documents. The petitioner produced the required documents on 21.03.2025, as per Ext.P7 covering letter. After that, the petitioner also produced a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Irrigation WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:41544 Department on 15.04.2025, though it was not necessary. However, the 2nd respondent failed to process the application for the trade licence within the mandatory time period of 30 days as envisaged under Section 236(3) of the Act. Instead, the 2nd respondent sent Ext.P8 rejection order, in Ext.P9 postal cover, only on 20.05.2025, i.e., after the expiry of 30 days from 15.04.2025. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to a declaration as prayed in the writ petition.
3. The 2nd respondent has filed a statement refuting the allegations in the writ petition. It is contended that Ext.P5 application was rejected by the 2 nd respondent on 23.04.2025 by Ext.P8 order. Therefore, the deeming provision under the Act is not attracted.
4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit denying the allegations in the counter affidavit. The petitioner has produced Ext.P9 postal cover and Ext.P10 track consignment letter, to establish that Ext.P8 order was sent by the 2nd respondent by registered post on WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:41544 20.05.2025 and was received by the petitioner only on 21.05.2025.
5. When the writ petition came up for consideration on 26.05.2025, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that, a copy of Ext.P8 order was served on the authorised representative of the petitioner. Accordingly, this Court directed the respondents to produce the proof of delivery of Ext.P8 order.
6. Pursuant to the said order, the 2nd respondent has filed an affidavit stating that, after the receipt of the NOC from the Irrigation Department on 15.04.2025, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P8 order on 23.04.2025, which is within eight days. The order was collected by a representative of the petitioner from the 2nd respondent on 24.04.2025. Thereafter, the Managing Partner of the petitioner also collected a copy of the order from the 2nd respondent on 12.05.2025. However, the respondents have candidly admitted that they have not WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:41544 obtained any acknowledgment regarding the service of a copy of the order. Subsequently, Ext.P8 order was dispatched by registered post to the petitioner on 20.05.2025, in the routine course of business.
7. Heard; the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had submitted Ext.P5 application on 20.02.2025. In response to Ext.P6 letter, the petitioner had submitted the additional documents and Ext.R2(a) NOC from the Irrigation Department before the 2nd respondent on 21.03.2025 and 15.04.2025, respectively.
9. In the above context, it is necessary to refer to Section 236(3) of the Act, which reads as follows:
"236.General provisions regarding licences and permissions:-
(1) xxxx (2) xxxx (3) Save as aforesaid, if orders on an application for any such licence or permission are not communicated to the applicant within thirty days or such longer period as may be WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:41544 prescribed in any class of cases after the receipt of the application by the Secretary, the application shall be deemed to have been allowed for the period, if any, for which it would have been ordinarily allowed and subject to the law, rules and bye-laws and all conditions ordinarily imposed."
10. A reading of the above provision mandates that an order passed by the statutory authority under the Act has to be communicated to the applicant within 30 days from the date of passing of the order.
11. The mandatory compliance of the above provision is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court Koottikkal Grama Panchayath and Another v. Vazhathara Granites and Aggregates Pvt.Ltd. [2018 KHC 4640].
12. In Jalaludeen K v. Veliyam Grama Panchayat [2024 KHC 1108], this Court has held that, the mere dispatch of a letter would not suffice to avoid the consequence of the deeming provision. The order has to be communicated to the applicant in order to avoid the consequence of the deeming factor.
WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 7
2025:KER:41544
13. In view of the affidavit filed by the respondents dated 05.06.2025, it is not in dispute that the 2nd respondent had only sent Ext.P8 order by registered post on 20.05.2025. Even though it is alleged that a copy of Ext.P8 order was collected by the petitioner's representative on 24.04.2025 and the petitioner's Managing Partner on 12.05.2025, admittedly, there is no acknowledgment or proof of service/communication. Therefore, the said statement is not satisfactory and worthy of credence to fulfill the mandatory requirement envisaged under Section 236 of Act and the interpretations given by this Court in the aforesaid decisions.
In the aforesaid circumstances, I allow the writ petition by quashing Ext.P8 order and declaring that the petitioner has secured a valid trade licence under Sections 232 and 233 of the Act, by virtue of Section 236 (3) of the Act. Consequently, the 2nd respondent is directed to issue the petitioner the trade licence in the WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 8 2025:KER:41544 paper form within one week from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention, in case the petitioner violates the conditions of the licence, it would be open to the 2nd respondent to cancel the licence, in accordance with law.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE NAB WP(C) NO. 19292 OF 2025 9 2025:KER:41544 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19292/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED 06.02.2023 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE DATED 04.01.2025 VALID TILL 31.10.2029 ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE DATED 23.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE SEIAA. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENSE VALID TILL 31.03.2030.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 20.02.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.03.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.04.2025 BEARING NO. JC3.884/2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL COVER ENCLOSING EXT.P8.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSIGNMENT DETAILS OF
THE CONSIGNMENT BEARING NO. RL
159870101IN AS AVAILABLE FROM THE POSTAL WEBSITE.
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE-R2(a) THE COVERING LETTER DATED 15.04.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS