Kerala High Court
Aniyeri Sathyan vs State Police Chief on 9 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 20TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.20840 OF 2020(D)
PETITIONER/S:
ANIYERI SATHYAN,
AGED 52 YEARS,
S/O.NARAYANAN, ANIYERINTAVIDA HOUSE, CHENDAYAD P O,
KANNUR DISTRICT - 670692.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ALEX.M.SCARIA
SRI.A.J.RIYAS
SMT.SARITHA THOMAS
SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE POLICE CHIEF,
KERALA STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, 695010.
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
POST OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR, KERALA - 670002.
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KULAVALLOOR POLICE STATION, KULAVELLOOR, KERALA -
670693.
4 SAJEEVAN,
S/O. KUNJIRAMAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
PALAYANKANDI, POILOOR P.O, KANNUR - 6706923.
5 JINEESH M,
S/O. BALAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
,MANATTIYIL HOUSE, POILOOR P O, KANNUR - 6706923.
6 M.P.SHAJI
MUTHANGACHALIL HOUSE,
S/O. GOVINDAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
POILOOR P.O, KANNUR - 6706923.
7 RAJAN,
ECHILATTU CHALIL HOUSE,
S/O. KANARAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
POILOOR P.O, KANNUR - 6706923.
WP(C).No.20840 OF 2020 2
8 RATHEESHAN
THARASSIYIL HOUSE, S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY,
CENTRAL POILOOR, POILOOR P.O, KANNUR - 6706923.
9 JIL JITH,
S/O. RAJAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
KARIYARICHALAIL HOUSE, POILOOR PO,
KANNUR - 6706923.
10 AJAYAN,
S/O. GOVINDHAN, AGE NOT KNOWN, KARIYARICHALAIL
HOUSE, POILOOR P O, KANNUR - 6706923.
11 CHEMBERI SURAN,
S/O. KUNJIRAMAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
UNDALEL HOUSE, POILOOR P O, KANNUR - 6706923.
12 M.R. VASU,
S/O. KUNJIRAMAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
KANNIPOYIL HOUSE, POILOOR PO, KANNUR - 6706923.
13 PAVITHRAN,
KACHERI HOUSE, S/O. KANNAN, AGE NOT KNOWN,
KANNIPOYIL HOUSE, POILOOR P O, KANNUR - 6706923.
R1 TO R3 SRI P P THAJUDEEN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R4 TO R13 BY ADVS. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
SMT.BINDU SREEDHAR
SHRI.ASIF N
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
09.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.20840 OF 2020 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to have secured all statutory licenses and
permits to conduct quarrying operations in property having an extent of
2.1492 hectares comprised in Re-Sy. No. 113/1F of Thriprangottoor Village.
He is aggrieved by the obstructions caused by the party respondents and
the failure of the police to afford adequate protection. It is in the afore
circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking for issuance of
directions to the respondents 1 to 3 to grant protection to the petitioner, his
employees and staff to carry out the functioning of the quarry.
2. The petitioner states that he decided to commence a quarry in
the property aforementioned. He is required to obtain multiple clearances
and permits from statutory authorities as well as the Local Self Government
Institutions. To further his end, he approached the District Environmental
Impact Assessment Authority, which authority after considering his request
for grant of environmental clearance for the proposed Granite (building
stone) quarry and after complying with all formalities, issued Ext.P1
environmental clearance subject to conditions.
3. Petitioner relies on Exhibit P2 quarrying lease issued by the
Director of Mining and Geology whereby the State Government has granted
lease to the petitioner to carry out mining activities in the land scheduled
thereunder for a period of six years from 23/11/2018 and ending on
23/11/2024 for the purpose of extracting minor minerals/minerals subject to
the terms and conditions contained in the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession
Rules, 2015.
4. The petitioner would then rely on Exhibit P3 integrated consent
to operate issued by the Environmental Engineer, Kerala State Pollution
Control Board, to operate a quarry in the property covered under Exhibit P2
lease.
5. The petitioner states that he has also been issued with Exhibit
P4 license under Section 232 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act which enables
him to carry out quarrying activities in the property covered under Ext.P2
lease.
6. According to the petitioner, the Deputy Chief Controller of
Explosives has issued Exhibit P5 explosive licence in form LE-3 of Explosives
Rules, 2008 permitting the petitioner to possess and use explosives in
another property in his possession.
7. It is contended that though the petitioner has secured all
permits and licenses from the statutory authorities, the party respondents
are obstructing his activities and are demanding huge sums to permit him to
carry out the functioning of the quarry. He contends that the demand is
illegal.
8. The petitioner states that on 11/9/2020, the party respondents
accompanied with certain persons trespassed into the quarry and attacked
his employees. Crime No.404 of 2020 of the Kolavalloor Police Station was
registered and the respondent Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 8 are the accused in the said
crime. In spite of the registration of the crime as aforesaid, party
respondents are continuing with the illegal acts.
9. In the said circumstances, he lodged Exhibit P7 complaint
before the 2nd respondent seeking intervention. His grievance is that no
action was taken by the Police. This has led the petitioner to approach this
Court seeking intervention and for issuance of direction to the Police to
grant protection to him and his employees for carrying out the functioning
of the quarry.
10. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent for
himself and for and on behalf of the other party respondents. According to
the 4th respondent, the petitioner has not secured Certificate from the
Health Inspector, Clearance from the Police authorities, NOC from the Fire
and Rescue Department, consent from the neighbouring residents, blasters
license, and license under the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act.
It is also contended that the petitioner has failed to obtain a Certificate from
the Village Officer. It is further contended that the quarry is situated near to
a stream called Vengal Thodu, which is the only source of drinking water for
the local residents. The Kerala Water Authority has constructed two water
tanks nearby. According to the party respondents, in view of the provisions
of the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act, 2003, the petitioner
cannot commence the functioning of the quarry near the water tank. It is
further contended that Exhibit P4 license issued by the Local Self
Government Institution under Section 232 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act
was without considering the adverse consequences that are likely to occur
in the event of the petitioner commencing his quarry operations.
11. The petitioner has filed a reply to the counter affidavit
controverting the assertions in the counter filed by the party respondents.
According to the petitioner, Exhibit P4 permit issued by the Local Self
Government presupposes that the petitioner has obtained all necessary
permits for carrying out the functioning of the quarry. It is contended that
the petitioner is not bound to approach authorities like the Health Inspector,
the Police, and the Fire and Rescue Department as they have no role in the
matter of mining. Since no explosives are stored in the property covered
under the quarrying lease, No Objection Certificate from the Fire and
Rescue Department is not required. It is further contended that no stream
or water tank is situated near to the quarry. The nearby house is situated
more than 350 meters away and these aspects were considered by the
statutory authorities before grant of permit. It is further stated that the
party respondents are accused in numerous cases and in view of their
intimidatory tactics, the petitioner is not able to commence the functioning
of the quarry.
12. An additional counter affidavit has been filed by the
respondents 4 to 13. It is contended that Exhibit P4 license granted to the
petitioner is only a deemed license which was granted by the local authority
without ascertaining whether the petitioner has secured all permits and
licenses. It is further stated that on an earlier occasion the Panchayat had
refused the license and it was pursuant to orders passed by this Court that
the license was granted. It is contended that though this Court had granted
liberty to the Panchayat to issue show cause notice to the petitioner in the
event of any illegalities or legal infirmities, the same was not done for
extraneous reasons.
13. An additional reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner
denying the contentions raised by the party respondents in the additional
counter. Exhibit P13 certificate issued by the Village Officer is produced to
substantiate the fact that there are no streams nearby. Exhibit P16 voters
list is produced to show the details of residents in and around the quarry
and also to show that the name of the party respondents do not find a place
therein. According to the petitioner, the party respondents are residing far
off and the functioning of the quarry will not affect them let alone the
residents whose names are detailed in Exhibit P16.
14. A statement has been filed by the senior Government Pleader
for and on behalf of the third respondent. It is stated that the petitioner has
acquired licenses and consent from the statutory authorities for the purpose
of functioning the quarry. It is further stated that based on the complaint
that the party respondents had attacked the employees, Crime No.404/2020
of the Kolavalloor Police Station was registered. Later, based on information
given by an employee Crime No.408/2020 of the Kolavalloor Police Station
was registered. It is further stated that if any law and order situation arises,
necessary action shall be taken by the Police.
15. I have considered the submissions advanced by
Sri. P. Ramakrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.
MP Ashok Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the party respondents
and the learned Government pleader.
16. Before commencing quarrying operations in an area earmarked
for the purpose, an individual is required to procure permits and licence
from various authorities. In the case on hand, the records reveal that the
petitioner has obtained the Environmental Clearance from the DEIAA,
Kannur, a valid quarrying lease from the Government, a licence for
possession for use of explosives from the Deputy Chief Controller of
Explosives, the D&O licence from the local authority. The petitioner has also
produced the foreman certificate of competency to substantiate that a
qualified and approved foreman has been appointed to carry out opencast
blasting. The respondents do not have a case that the petitioner has not
secured the valid permits to carry out the quarrying activities. On the other
hand, their contention is that the statutory authorities as well as the local
authority has failed to consider the relevant facts before permitting
quarrying activities. They also have a contention that the petitioner is
required to obtain consent from the Health authorities, certificate from the
Village Officer, licence under the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation
Act.
17. The petitioner has produced Ext.P9 circular issued by the
Government which provides for the procedure to be adopted to simplify the
licencing procedure in the matter of quarrying and also to ensure greater
transparency, safety as well as coordination. As per the said circular, the
local self government institutions have been designated as the Terminal
Nodal Point for ensuring compliance with all the statutes prior to grant of
D&O licenses under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. To achieve this end, the
LSGI has been asked to work as a single window to collect and circulate to
the other departments, i.e., department of Mining and Geology, Revenue
Department, the Controller of Explosives and the State Pollution Control
Board. In order to save time, the entrepreneur could also approach the
different agencies. In the case on hand, it is revealed that the petitioner
has secured all permits and D&O license has also been issued by the
Panchayat, though after a protracted litigation. In that view of the matter,
the contention that the petitioner is required to obtain additional permits
and consent cannot be accepted. Though the party respondents contend
that the petitioner is required to obtain permit under the Kerala Irrigation
and Water Conservation Act, the certificate issued by the Village Officer
which is produced as Ext.P13, reveals that there are no streams nearby.
Even otherwise, this Court while holding that the petitioner is entitled to
obtain a deemed permit had left open the right of the local authority to
initiate any action if there are any illegalities or infirmities. There is no case
for the party respondents that any such action was taken. Furthermore, the
learned Government Pleader has filed a statement for and on behalf of the
3rd respondent that the petitioner has obtained all permits and licences for
the purpose of running the quarry.
18. Having considered all the relevant facts, I am of the considered
opinion that there is no justification on the part of the party respondents in
physically obstructing the quarrying activities and in intimidating and
threatening the petitioner and his workers. I find that two crimes have
already been registered against the party respondents and their men. As
long as the petitioner is operating the quarry with all permits, it is for the
respondents 2 and 3 to ensure that he is permitted to function the
establishment without any obstruction from the party respondents or their
men.
Resultantly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to
approach the respondents 2 and 3 if any obstruction is caused by the party
respondents or their men to the functioning of the quarry covered under
Ext.P2 quarrying lease and Ext.P1 environmental clearance. The
respondents 2 and 3 shall afford adequate protection to the life and
property of the petitioner and his employees to enable them to conduct
quarrying activities strictly in accordance with Exts.P1 to P5.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
ps
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE
BEARING NO. 53/KNR/2017/DEIAA DATED
18.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
AUTHORITY, KANNUR, IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED
23.11.2018 SIGNED BY THE ADDITIONAL
DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TRADE CONSENT BEARING
NO. PCB.KNR/ICO-R1/510/2020 DATED
18.06.2020 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE TRADE LICENCE BEARING
NO.41/2020-2021/A-3/A2-731/20 DATED
04/01/2020 ISSUED BY THE THRIPPRANGOTTUR
GRAMA PANCHAYATH
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENCE
BEARING NO. E/SC/KL/22/1695(E71609)
DATED 10.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY
CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R DATED 22.09.2020
IN CRIME NO. 404 OF 2020 REGISTERED BY
THE KULAVALLUR POLICE STATION.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
21.09.2020 LODGED BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED
22/09/2020 BEARING NO.
666/CAMP/PTN/2020C ISSUED IN ACCEPTANCE
OF EXHIBIT-P7.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED
15/03/2010 BEARING NO.78327/RC3/09/LSGD
ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF OF APPOINTMENT OF
THE FOREMAN.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.
(C)NO.18315 OF 2018 DATED 19.09.2018.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A NO.2050
OF 2018 DATED 17.10.2018.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
10.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE
OFFICER, THRIPPANGOTTOOR
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF RE-SURVEY FIELD
MEASUREMENTS OF THE QUARRY AREA OF
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUTS WITH
DISTANCE CALCULATIONS THROUGH GOOGLE
EARTH SOFTWARE, ON GOOGLE EARTH MAP,
SHOWING THE DISTANCE OF LOCATIONS OF BSF
WATER TANK AND THE NEAREST DWELLING
HOUSE WITH THE QUARRY OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPIES OF THE RELEVANT PAGES (FIRST
AND LAST) IS LATEST VOTERS LIST OF THE
WARD NO.IV OF THRIPPANGOTTOOR GRAMA
PANCHAYATH.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R4(a) PHOTOCOPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF GRAMA
SABHA DT 07/10/2013.
EXHIBIT R4 (b) PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
GRAMA SABHA DT 15/01/2019.
EXHIBIT R4(c) PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT 10/05/2017
FILED BEFORE CHIEF MINISTER
EXHIBIT R4 (d) PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTIMATION LETTER DT
06/06/2017 ISSUED FROM OFFICE OF CHIEF
MINISTER
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
