Koshy Samuel vs The Director General Of Police
2023 Latest Caselaw 9364 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
                                &
         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
   FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 3RD BHADRA, 1945
                     W.A.NO.1515 OF 2023
        AGAINST THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 22.08.2023 IN
 W.P.(C)NO.18877 OF 2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
                 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:
    1     KOSHY SAMUEL, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. SAMUEL,
          THARAYILETH HOUSE, VENMANI VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR
          TALUK, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 689509

    2     ANTO ALPHONSE, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. ALPHONSE
          ANTONY, ALPHONSE VILLA, EDATHUA VILLAGE, KUTTANAD
          TALUK, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 689573

          BY ADVS.
          SHABU SREEDHARAN
          VISHNU PREMKUMAR
          AMAL BIJU
          SIDHARTH S.
          ZAKKIR HUSSAIN P.B.


RESPONDENTS:
    1     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD
          QUARTERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          PIN - 695014

    2     THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA, CCSB
          ROAD, CIVIL STATION WARD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688012

    3     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VENMANI POLICE STATION,
          VENMANI P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 689509

    4     SHIJU K.S., SREERANGATH, VENMANI P.O., ALAPPUZHA,
          PIN - 689509

    5
          P.R. RAMESH KUMAR, PUTHUSSERI MURIYIL, VENMANI
                                      2

W.A.No.1515 of 2023



               P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 689509

      6        NELSON JOY, THENGIZETH, VENMANI P.O., ALAPPUZHA,
               PIN - 689509

      7        SREENIVASAN, MULLA, PUNTHALA P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN
               - 689509


OTHER PRESENT:
          GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M. RAJEEV


        THIS     WRIT   APPEAL   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
25.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                      3

W.A.No.1515 of 2023



                               JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The appellants filed W.P.(C)No.18877 of 2023, seeking a writ

of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate

police protection to them, their representatives and workers for

extracting and transporting ordinary sand from the property

belonging to the 1st appellant, on the strength of Ext.P2,

quarrying permit No.02/23-24/OE/DOALA-DMG/231/2023-M dated

22.05.2023 issued by the Department of Mining and Geology. They

have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents

1 to 3 to take appropriate legal/penal action against respondents 4

to 7 and their men for their alleged atrocities and illegalities in the

matter.

2. On 22.08.2023, when that writ petition came up for

consideration, it was submitted before the learned Single Judge

that a stop memo has already been issued by the Grama Panchayat

to the petitioners (appellants herein) restricting removal of ordinary

earth. Based on that submission, the learned Single Judge in the

order dated 22.08.2023, observed as follows;

"If that is the case, interim order need not be continued. But the petitioner is free to move this writ petition, if the stop

W.A.No.1515 of 2023

memo is varied or modified."

3. In the appeal the appellants would contend that the

learned Single Judge went wrong in modifying/vacating the interim

order on account of the stop memo issued by the Grama Panchayat.

4. On a query made by this Court, the learned counsel for

the appellants would submit that the stop memo issued by the

Grama Panchayat is under challenge in another writ petition, which

is pending consideration before the learned Single Judge.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also

the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3.

6. It is well settled by the judgment in Bhaskara Rao A.B.

v. CBI [(2011) 10 SCC 259] that, generally, no court has

competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor can the Court

direct an authority to act in contravention of the statutory

provisions. The Courts are meant to enforce the rule of law and not

to pass the orders or directions which are contrary to what has been

injected by law.

7. Having considered the materials on record and also the

submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and also

the learned Senior Government Pleader, we find no reason to

interfere with the interim order dated 22.08.2023 of the learned

W.A.No.1515 of 2023

Single Judge.

8. In the instant case, the appellants have already been

issued with a stop memo by the concerned Grama Panchayat

imposing restrictions regarding removal of ordinary earth on the

strength of Ext.P2 quarrying permit. The challenge made by the

appellants against that order is pending consideration in another

writ petition. During the pendency of that writ petition, the

appellants cannot insist that he should be given adequate police

protection for removal of sand from the property in question,

ignoring the stop memo issued by the Grama Panchayat.

In the result, this writ appeal fails and the same is accordingly

dismissed.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

MIN