Madhulal M.G vs The Director Of Mining And Geology
2021 Latest Caselaw 22152 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
    FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 24148 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          MADHULAL M.G.,
          AGED 36 YEARS,
          PALATTU, KRWA-231C, KUTHIRAKKADU LANE,
          VATTIYOORKAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 013.
          BY ADVS.
          ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
          S.SREEDEV
          RONY JOSE
          SUZANNE KURIAN
          CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
          DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, PATTOM P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.
    2     THE GEOLOGIST,
          MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OFFICE,
          KOLLAM-691 008.


          SRI. S.KANNAN-SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.24148 OF 2021

                                         2




                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 5th day of November 2021

This writ petition is filed seeking the

following reliefs.

(i)Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P7 and quash the same.

(ii)Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 2 nd respondent to re-consider Ext.P1 application for quarrying permit submitted by the petitioner, de hors Exhibit P2, and pass orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 2 weeks.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner's

application to grant quarrying permit had been rejected

by the 2nd respondent by Ext.P7 order citing that it WP(C).No.24148 OF 2021

does not satisfy the distance criteria prescribed in

Exhibit P2 order issued by the National Green Tribunal.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

that the Exhibit P2 order of the National Green Tribunal

has been set aside in Exhibit P9 judgment, and that the

application, therefore, is liable to be considered

independently. It is further stated in Exhibit P7 order

that there is an electric room 12 metres from the

blasting site. It is submitted by the learned counsel for

the petitioner that the said electric room has already

been re-located outside the prescribed distance.

Having considered the contentions advanced,

I notice that the substantial reason stated in Exhibit P7

no longer subsists, since the order of the NGT stands

set aside by the Apex Court and the NGT has been

required to pass fresh orders after hearing the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submits

that the further reason stated in Exhibit P7 also does WP(C).No.24148 OF 2021

not exist. In the result, Exhibit P7 shall stand set

aside. There will be a direction to the 2 nd respondent

to take up the application submitted by the petitioner

for quarrying permit and to consider and pass orders

on the same after considering all relevant aspects

within a period of one month from the date of receipt

of copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SSK/5/11 WP(C).No.24148 OF 2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.07.2021 Exhibit P1 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.07.2020 IN OA Exhibit P2 304/2019 ISUSED BY THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 27.07.2021 Exhibit P3 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANCODE. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 04.08.2021 ISSUED Exhibit P4 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE Exhibit P5 PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.09.2021 IN Exhibit P6 WPC NO.15370/2021 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.10.2021 BEARING Exhibit P7 NO.286/2021-22/DOQ/S2/1733/2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.10.2021 ISSUED Exhibit P8 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.10.2021 IN Exhibit P9 CIVIL APPEAL NO.6273/2021 AND BATCH OF CASES.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:          NIL



  SSK                           //TRUE COPY//          PA TO JUDGE