Kerala High Court
K.S .Ali vs The Village Officer, Vadakkanchery-I ... on 27 March, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 11726 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
K.S .ALI
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. LATE SYED MOHAMMED, KARINKULAM HOUSE, ALATHUR TALUK,
VADAKKANCHERY, PALAKKAD , ., PIN - 678683
BY ADVS.
M.A.VAHEEDA BABU
ARYA RAGHUNATH
P.LAKSHMI
DENNIS BIJU
BABU KARUKAPADATH
KARUKAPADATH WAZIM BABU
AYSHA E.M.
SHAWN JOHNSON
P.U.VINOD KUMAR
SHIFANA KAISE
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VADAKKANCHERY-I VILLAGE
VADAKKANCHERY I VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN -
678683
2 VADAKKANCHERY GRAMA PANCHAYAT,REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY.
ALATHUR TALUK, VADAKKANCHERY P.O., PALAKKAD PIN-, 678
683., PIN - 678683
3 THE SECRETARY
VADAKKANCHERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALATHUR TALUK,
VADAKKANCHERY P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683
4 T.S SREEKALA,,
AGED 48 YEARS
WORKING AS THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VADAKKANCHERY I, VILLAGE,
ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683
5 C. AKHIL KUMAR,
AGED 35 YEARS
WORKING AS THE VILLAGE ASSISTANT, VADAKKANCHERY I,
VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678683
OTHER PRESENT:
GP - DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C). No.11726 of 2024 :2:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
W.P.(C) No.11726 of 2024
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Dated this the 27th day of March, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P6
stop memo issued by the 1st respondent.
2. It is averred that the petitioner is the owner of 1 Acres 10
cents of land situated in Block No.45 Re-Survey No.30 of
Vadakkanchery I Village of Alathur Taluk. The said property was
part of a larger extent of property having an extent of about 6.5
Acres belonging to the father of the petitioner, which was inherited
by the petitioner and his siblings on his death. The petitioner would
contend that when the petitioner decided to construct a residential
house in a portion of the said property he tried to develop the same
by leveling and thereupon Ext.P1 stop memo was issued by the 1 st
respondent. The petitioner submits that necessary building permit
and site approval has been granted by the local authority as is
evident from Ext.P2 and the petitioner was directed to pay royalty
and as per Ext.P3, the royalty amount was also deposited by the
petitioner. Thereafter the 3rd respondent granted Transit Permit for
extracting and transporting 4578.72 Tons of ordinary earth from
the property of the petitioner with Mineral Transit Passes as is
evident from Exts.P4 and P5. Thereafter the petitioner started to
level the property and thereupon Ext.P6 stop memo was again
issued by the 1st respondent. The petitioner submits that the 1 st
respondent has absolutely no authority to issue a stop memo. The
petitioner would contend that since the plinth area of the building
is below 3000 sq.ft., the statutory authority to issue transit passes
etc., is the local authority and the same has been issued by the
local authority as per Exts.P4 and P5 and that if there is any
illegality committed by the petitioner, it is for respondents 2 & 3 -
local authority to take appropriate action.
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Panchayat would
submit that the petitioner has been granted necessary building
permit and site approval and also Exts.P4 and P5 transit passes.
4. Heard the learned Government Pleader also, who upon
instructions submitted that the plinth area of the building is less
than 3000 sq. ft. and it is for the Panchayat to take appropriate
action for the issuance of transit passes and to issue stop memo in
case of any violation and to take appropriate action in accordance
with law.
5. In view of the above facts and circumstance of the case, I
am of the opinion that Ext.P6 is issued by an incompetent authority
and accordingly the same is set aside. It is made clear that in case
of any violation of the building permit and Exts.P4 and P5 transit
passes, the 3rd respondent shall take appropriate action on the
same. If any illegality is committed by the petitioner the 1 st
respondent can intimate the same to the 3 rd respondent, who shall
take appropriate action in accordance with law.
The petitioner submits that because of the stop memo issued
by the 1st respondent, he could not transport the earth for many
days and therefore it is ordered that if the petitioner approaches
the 3rd respondent with a request in this regard, appropriate
decision on the same shall be taken in accordance with law
regarding extending the validity period of Ext.P5.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sm/
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11726/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED
01/12/2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
TO THE PETITIONER,
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SITE APPROVAL AND
BUILDING PERMIT DATED 05/02/2024 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER,
ALONG WITH THE APPROVED SITE/LOCATION
PLAN,
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN RECEIPT DATED
12/02/2024 EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF
RS.1,83,149/- BY THE PETITIONER AT THE
SUB TREASURY, VADAKKANCHERY TOWARDS THE
ROYALTY FOR REMOVAL OF ORDINARY EARTH
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSIT PERMIT DATED
14/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT,
UNDER RULE 14(2) & (3) OF THE KMMC RULES
FOR EXTRACTING AND TRANSPORTING 4578.72
TONS OF ORDINARY EARTH FROM THE PROPERTY
OF THE PETITIONER WITH 500 MINERAL
TRANSIT PASSES HAVING ITS 1ST PHASE
VALIDITY FROM 15/02/2024 TO 16/03/2024,
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSIT PERMIT DATED
14/02/2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT,
UNDER RULE 14(2) & (3) OF THE KMMC RULES
FOR EXTRACTING AND TRANSPORTING 4578.72
TONS OF ORDINARY EARTH FROM THE PROPERTY
OF THE PETITIONER WITH 517 MINERAL
TRANSIT PASSES HAVING ITS 2ND PHASE
VALIDITY FROM 18/03/2024 TO 20/04/2024,
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED
16/03/2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
TO THE PETITIONER ALLEGING UNAUTHORIZED
EXTRACTION/MINING OF EARTH FROM THE
PURAYIDOM OF THE PETITIONER,
