Ilyas Babu K.V vs District Level Environment ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12751 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
       MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                         WP(C) NO. 11860 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              ILYAS BABU K.V
              PROPRIETOR, GRANITE BUILDING STONE QUARRY,
              S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, KOORIMANNIL VALIYAMANNIL HOUSE,
              ANAKKAYAM, MALAPPURAM

              BY ADVS.
              PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU
              SAJITHA GEOR


RESPONDENTS:

              1.DISTRICT LEVEL ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY
              (DEIAA), MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT
              COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM - 676 504

              2. DISTRICT EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (DEAC),
              REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST,
              MALAPPURAM - 676 121

              3. STATE LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY
              (SEIAA KERALA), REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY,
              4TH FLOOR, KSRTC BUS TERMINAL COMPLEX,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

              4. STATE EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS
              CHAIRMAN, PALLIKUMMU, KANNAMMOOLA ROAD, OVERBRIDGE,
              VELAKUDI, TRIVANDRUM - 695 024




               SRI.RAVIKRISHNAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 11860 OF 2021
                                    2



                           C.S.DIAS,J

                   ------------------------
                      WP(C).No.11860 of 2021
                   ------------------------
                  Dated this the 7th day of June, 2021

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has been issued with Ext.P1 quarrying lease for

extraction of Granite Building Stone from the property comprised in

Survey No.249(pt) of Anakkayam Village, Eranad Taluk, Malappuram

District.

2. It is a case of the petitioner that the 1 st respondent has

granted Environmental Clearance for the property covered by Ext.P1

only for a period of five years. In fact, the petitioner had submitted the

application for Environmental Clearance by proposing that the project

life would be 13 years, which was accepted by the 2 nd respondent

without any reservation, but the validity of the Environmental

Clearance has been limited to five years without assigning any reason,

which in turn is detrimental to the quarry project and is, therefore,

arbitrary, ultra vires and without jurisdiction. This Court while

considering cases of similar nature by Ext.P5 judgment directed the 1 st WP(C) NO. 11860 OF 2021

respondent to re-validate Environmental Clearance of the petitioner's

in the said cases for the full duration of the project life. Later, this

Court in Ext.P6 judgment also took the same stand as in Ext.P5

judgment. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for a similar relief and the

respondents may be directed to re-validate Ext.P2 Environmental

Clearance for the full duration of the project life of the quarry.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,

Sri.M.P.Sreekrishnan, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

3rd respondent and the learned Government Pleader for the other

respondents.

4. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record,

particularly, Exts.P5 and P6 judgments passed by this Court, I am of

the considered opinion that in the light of the law laid down by this

Court in the afore-cited judgments, that the petitioner is also entitled

for a similar relief. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ

petition by directing the petitioner to prefer an application before the

State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (3 rd

respondent) within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment, for re-validation of Ext.P2 Environmental Clearance. The 3 rd WP(C) NO. 11860 OF 2021

respondent, on receipt of the said application shall inform the

petitioner of the further documents/details, if any, required for

processing the application, within two weeks from the date thereof.

Thereafter, the 3rd respondent shall re-consider the said application

and pass appropriate orders on the application as expeditiously as

possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the

receipt of the details from the petitioner.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS,JUDGE

dlK 07.06.2021 WP(C) NO. 11860 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11860/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF QUARRYING LEASE DATED 17.05.2018 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE DATED 08.06.2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, VALID FOR 5 YEARS.

EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF APPROVED MINING PLAN DATED 24.02.2016 PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF SEIAA DATED 31.10.2014

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF 89TH MEETING OF THE SEIAA DATED 27.02.2019

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.11.2020 IN EXHIBIT P5 WP(C) NO.189/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 16.02.2021 IN EP(C) NO.3908/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.