Joice George vs The Bharananganam Grama ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 23423 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
  THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 12297 OF 2013
PETITIONER:

          JOICE GEORGE
          AGED 53 YEARS
          S/O.GEORGE, VALIAPARAMPIL HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM P.O.,
          PIN-686 578.
          BY ADV SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE BHARANANGANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT
          BHARANANGANAM P.O., PIN-686 578, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
    2     THE PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE
          BHARANANGANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, BHARANANGANAM P.O.,
          PIN-686 578, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
    3     THE SECRETARY
          BHARANANGANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, BHARANANGANAM P.O.,
          PIN-686 578, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
    4     SHAJAN.P.AHAS
          SECRETARY, BHARANANGANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, BHARANANGANAM
          P.O., PIN-686 578, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
    5     P.T.THANKACHAN
          PARAYIL HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 578.
    6     BABYCHAN JOSEPH
          ATTARMACKAL HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686
          578.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.R1 & R2 by SRI.PRAKASH C VADAKKAN, STANDING
          COUNSEL



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.12297/2013                        2




                                        JUDGMENT

Dated this the 25th day of November, 2021

The writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking the following reliefs:

i. Call for the records leading to Exhibit P10 and quash the same. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to issue the installation permission to the petitioner for his metal crusher unit, grant as applied for him and issue the license as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. Iii. Such other relief and orders as may be prayed for or deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. Brief material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows;

petitioner has been running a granite quarry & metal crusher unit in his own 10

Acres of property, which according to the petitioner, was done after securing

statutory licenses, certificates and consent for the past more than 20 years.

While so, petitioner applied for renewal of licence from the Secretary,

Bharananganam Grama Panchayat for the year 2013-2014. According to the

petitioner, the renewal application was submitted within time and he has

produced all records required for consideration of the application as directed by

the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat. However, the Panchayat Committee, has

not passed any orders as provided under section 233(3) of the Kerala Panchayat

Raj Act, 1994.

3. The case put forth by the petitioner is that some people, who are residing

far away from the quarry, are influencing the committee members and the

Secretary of the Grama Panchayat, not to renew the licence. Therefore, the case

put forth by the petitioner is that due to the pendency of application , a deemed

licence has been accrued to the petitioner. It is also the case of the petitioner

that the Panchayat has failed to perform its statutory duty warranting directions

from this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. That apart it is

pointed out that due to the pendency of application for licence before the

Panchayat, petitioner has suffered serious consequences and irreparable injuries.

4. Anyhow, against the conduct of the quarry and issuance of Exhibit P9

licence by the Panchayat, an aggrieved person has preferred an Appeal No. 425

of 2013 before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions,

Thiruvananthapuram, and the Tribunal has granted a stay of the proceedings of

the Panchayat Committee, evident from Exhibit P10.

5. I have perused the pleadings and materials on record and heard

Sri.Prakash C. Vadakkan, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

6. On going through the documents produced by the petitioner, it is clear

that the statutory clearances, consent and permits issued by the Pollution Control

Board and all other statutory authorities, including the authority under the Minor

Mineral Concession Rules, have expired and therefore, the writ petition, at this

distance of time, has no sustenance as there is no requirement for adjudicating

the issues raised by the petitioner on its merit. Which thus means, the writ

petition has become infructuous and accordingly it is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, smv JUDGE

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12297/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER (RE-DESIGNATED) AS SECRETARY OF THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT BY ORDR NO.B3-438/90 DATED 20.8.1991.

EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE CONSENT OF THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ALONGWITH THE SITE LOCATION PLAN.

EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECRICAL SUB DIVISION, RAMAPURAM DATED 4.3.13.

EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY INSPECTOR FACTORY BOILERS, KOTTAYAM DATED 4.2.2013.

EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER DATED 26.2.2013.

EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE OF THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL FIRE AND RESCUE OFFICER DATED 13.3.2011.

EXHIBIT P7: COOPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24/3/2012 EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION DATED 13.2.2013.

EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.3 DATED 26.4.2013 PRODUCED IN APPEAL 425/2013.

EXHIBIT P10: COPY OF THE STAY ORDER IN IA NO.816/2013 IN APPEAL LNO.425/2013.