Kunhiraman.M.P vs State Environmental Impact ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13519 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
         THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2021 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 12161 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              KUNHIRAMAN.M.P
              AGED 50 YEARS
              ARAYAKKANDY HOUSE, MULIYILNADA, THIRUVANGAD P.O. KANNUR 670
              103.

              BY ADVS.
              ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
              S.SREEDEV
              RONY JOSE
              SUZANNE KURIAN
              CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL



RESPONDENTS:

     1        STATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY ,
              K.S.R.T.C. BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR, THAMPANOOR,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER
              SECRETARY.

     2        STATE LEVEL EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE,
              K.S.R.T.C. BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR, THAMPANOOR,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

              BY ADV. M.P.SREEKRISHNAN, SC, SEIAA & SEAC


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                    SATHISH NINAN, J.
           ==================
               W. P. (C) No.12161 of 2021
           ==================
            Dated this the 1st day of July, 2021

                         JUDGMENT

The short grievance of the petitioner is that,

without providing a copy of the field inspection report and an opportunity of hearing, the second

respondent-State Level Expert Appraisal Committee

has decided to recommend the SEIAA to reject the

proposal of the petitioner for environmental

clearance. All that the petitioner seeks for is for

a copy of the report and an opportunity of hearing

by the Committee.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

Sri.Enoch David Simon and Sri.M.P.Sreekrishnan,

learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3. The prayer of the petitioner is only

reasonble and liable to be granted.

4. It is ordered that, the second respondent

shall issue a copy of the field inspection report

and affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner, and take a decision regarding the W. P. (C) No.12161 of 2021

proposal, de hors the decision taken in Ext.P4.

Writ petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy// P.S. to Judge APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12161/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED 26.04.2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY.

Exhibit P1 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29.07.2019 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST TO THE PETITIONER APPROVING THE MINING PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2 TRUE ABSTRACT COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 115TH MEETING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT HELD DURING NOVEMBER 3-5, 2020.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 13.01.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3(A) TRUE ABSTRACT COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 119TH MEETING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT HELD DURING FEBRUARY 23-25 2021.

Exhibit P4 TRUE ABSTRACT COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 121ST MEETING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT HELD DURING 22,23 & 27 APRIL 2021.

-----