Dileep Kumar T.C vs Mohammed Hanish
2024 Latest Caselaw 15619 Ker

Kerala High Court

Dileep Kumar T.C vs Mohammed Hanish on 6 June, 2024

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                     PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
     THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                        CON.CASE(C) NO. 192 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.28365 OF 2021 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/5th PETITIONER:

             DILEEP KUMAR T.C.
             AGED 45 YEARS
             S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KUDUKKEN HOUSE, PERITHATTA AMSOM AND
             DESOM, PERINTHATTA NORTH, P.O.ARAVANCHAL, KANNUR
             DISTRICT - 670 353.
             BY ADVS.
             V.HARISH
             RAJAN VISHNURAJ


RESPONDENTS/1ST RESPONDENT:

     1       MOHAMMED HANISH
             (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE
             PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,
             GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
 ADDL.R2     DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
             KANNUR.
             *ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED SUO MOTU VIDE ORDER DATED
             19.10.2023 IN COC 192/22
 ADDL.R3     DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL), KANNUR,
             NEAR KERALA ARMED POLICE IV BATTALION, DHARMASALA,
             KANNUR, KERALA -670 567.
             **ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 01.02.2024 IN IA
             1/24 IN COC 192/22.
             BY ADVS.
             ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
             GOVERNMENT PLEADER
             SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, (ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL)
             T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, (GOVERNMENT PLEADER)


     THIS    CONTEMPT   OF   COURT    CASE     (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022
                                  ..2..




                        J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 6th day of June, 2024

Petitioner herein is the petitioner in

W.P(C)No.28365/2021. The instant contempt is

initiated alleging willful disobedience of the

interim order passed by the learned Single Judge

of this Court dated 10.12.2021, in the above

referred Writ Petition. The operative portion of

the said order is extracted herebelow:

"There will be an interim direction to the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P12 representation preferred by the petitioners and to consider and pass appropriate orders on the same and issue necessary directions after hearing them through any appropriate means including video conferencing within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

..3..

2. It is not in dispute that, at the time when

the contempt was initiated, no orders were passed

by the 1st respondent in compliance of the above

referred direction. However, when the contempt

case was pending, the 1st respondent issued G.O.

(Rt)No.179/2022/ID dated 01.03.2022, after

consideration of Ext.P12 representation. The

operative portion of the said order is also

extracted herebelow.

"7.Government have examined the case in detail on the basis of the report submitted by Director, Mining & Geology Department, District Collector, Kannur, Geologist, Kannur and arguments put forth by the Counsel of the petitioner. Some practical difficulties are mentioned in the report of the Mining & Geology Director, on the proper implementation of Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 to seize the illegally extracted minerals. Accordingly orders are issued by

..4..

authorizing Mining & Geology Director to furnish a proposal containing the following facts, within a period of one month without fail, for resolving the issues & allegations raised against the illegal laterite (building stone) mining.

1. A proposal to constitute an inter departmental official team comprising officials from Mining & Geology department, Police Department and Revenue Department, for conducting regular inspections in the field to prevent illegal mining of laterite stones at the source and its transportation.

2. list out the practical difficulties being faced on the proper implementation of Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and remedies thereof.

3. specific remarks on filing complaint before police in cases of illegal mining, enabling the Geologists to register FIR under 379 of IPC.

..5..

8. The orders of the Hon'ble High Court vide its interim order read as 2nd paper above is complied with accordingly."

3. Now, the contention of the learned counsel for

the petitioner is that, the G.O. above referred

dated 01.03.2022, does not amount to compliance of

the directions contained in the interim order of

this Court dated 10.12.2021. The learned counsel

would submit that, pursuant to the practical

difficulties, dealt with under serial nos.2 and 3

in paragraph no.7 of G.O. (extracted above), has

not been addressed by the Government so far and no

final orders have been passed. According to the

learned counsel, the present G.O. would only

constitute an interim order. So long as a final

order is not passed in tune with the directions

contained in the interim order of this Court, the

..6..

directions cannot be construed as complied with,

wherefore, a contempt would lie, is the submission

made. Learned counsel would also submit that,

unless a final order is passed, the petitioners

will be handicapped to challenge the same.

4. In answer to the above, learned Additional

Advocate General would submit that, the directions

contained in the interim order has been fully

complied with, by issuance of G.O. dated

01.03.2022. The learned Additional Advocate

General would emphasize that, the direction was

only to consider Ext.P12 representation and to

pass appropriate orders on the same and issue

necessary directions. Ext.P12 has been considered

and G.O. afore referred has been issued. During

the course of consideration, some practical

difficulties were identified in the context of

implementation of Section 21(5) of the Mines and

Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957,

..7..

('the Act' for short). Taking stock of the same,

orders have been issued, which are encapsulated in

serial nos.1, 2 and 3, in the subject G.O. Learned

Additional Advocate General would point out that,

the petitioner has no right to insist that his

representation should either be allowed in toto or

dismissed, failing which the directions contained

in the interim order cannot be construed, as not

complied with. Once Ext.P12 representation has

been considered and orders passed, no further

proceedings in contempt can be initiated. As

regards the subsequent order passed by this Court

dated 06.06.2023 directing the Government Pleader

to get specific instructions regarding the steps

taken pursuant to the G.O. issued by the

Government, it is the submission of the learned

Additional Advocate General that, the said interim

order is beyond the scope of a contempt

proceedings. The petitioner can challenge, or for

that matter, redress his grievance, if any, in the

..8..

pending Writ Petition, is the final submission

made by the learned Additional Advocate General.

5. Although, this Court finds that, the concern

raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner

is a matter of serious public importance, this

Court has to notice that the same is beyond the

scope of the contempt jurisdiction. As already

pointed out, the interim order was to consider and

pass orders in Ext.P12 representation. One among

the issues which was espoused in Ext.P12 was with

respect to implementation of Section 21(5) of the

Act. It cannot be said on a perusal of G.O. dated

01.03.2022 that Ext.P12 has not been considered.

The very fact that the 1st respondent identified

certain practical difficulties in the context of

implementation of Section 21(5) itself would vouch

that Ext.P12 has been considered. The G.O.

suggests certain further actions to be done, which

includes a course to list out the practical

..9..

difficulties in implementing Section 21(5) and

also the remedies thereof. It also directs

specific remarks on filing complaint before the

Police in cases of illegal mining, enabling the

Geologist to register FIR under Section 379 of the

Indian Penal Code, as well. These are the matters

to be included in a proposal.

6. It could thus be seen that, Ext.P12 has been

considered and certain actions were directed. The

G.O. may not have redressed the grievance of the

petitioners in full, or it may be the case that

the petitioners do not endorse the way in which

Ext.P12 representation has been considered and

disposed of. If that be the situation, the course

of the petitioners is to challenge the same in

accordance with law, either in the pending Writ

Petition or in such other manner, as advised. This

Court is convinced that there exists no contempt,

in the sense, there is no willful disobedience of

..10..

the interim order passed by this Court dated

10.12.2021.

7. In the circumstances, leaving open all such

other remedies available to the petitioners in

accordance with law, this contempt action is

closed.

Sd/-

C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE TR

..11..

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 192/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 10/12/2021 IN WP(C) NO.28365 OF 2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. Annexure A2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07/01/2022 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL OF THE PETITIONER.

Annexure A3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED 12/01/2022.

Annexure A4 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ILLEGAL MINING THE TRANSPORTATION OF LATERITE IN PERINGOME, PERINTHALA AND ERAMOM VILLAGES IN HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS.

RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R(a) A TRUE COPY OF G.O. 1241/22/ID DATED 22.11.22