Ebin Jacob vs The Director
2024 Latest Caselaw 14407 Ker

Kerala High Court

Ebin Jacob vs The Director on 31 May, 2024

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
            FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                             WP(C) NO. 17955 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

     1        EBIN JACOB
              AGED 33 YEARS
              S/O JACOB VELLINAYIL HOUSE, PETITIONER NJEEZHUR P.O,
              KOTTAYAM DIST, PIN - 686612
              BY ADV BABY KURIAKOSE


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DIRECTOR
              MINING AND GEOLOGY, DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
              KESAVADASAPURAM TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695004
     2        THE JOINT SECRETARY
              INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT. RESPONDENTS SECRETARIATE,
              TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695001
     3        THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST
              THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY CIVIL STATION,
              KOTTAYAM, PIN 686001., PIN - 695001
     4        THE TAHSILDAR
              VAIKOM TALUK VAIKOM P.O KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686141

              BY ADV.SRI.AJITH VISWANTHAN, GP


     THIS     WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C.) No.17955 of 2024


                                       2




                          C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
                    ------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C.) No.17955 of 2024
                    ------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 31st day of May, 2024

                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P6 demand notice,

wherein it is alleged that the petitioner had excavated soil

and minerals in excess of the permitted quantity.

Challenging Ext.P6, the petitioner preferred Ext.P7 appeal

before the second respondent. The same is pending

consideration. The petitioner seeks disposal of the same.

One of the important grounds raised by the petitioner is

denial of natural justice in passing Ext.P6 demand notice.

2. In the above referred facts and circumstances,

there will be a direction to the second respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 appeal, in accordance

with law, within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is specifically

directed that the second respondent shall also address the

petitioner's grievance with respect to denial of natural

justice in issuing Ext.P6 demand notice. It is further

directed that until Ext.P7 appeal is disposed of, no

coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P6 shall be taken against

the petitioner.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

C. JAYACHANDRAN

JUDGE SKP/31-05

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17955/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO. 5245/15 DATED 30-09-2015 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE DATED 03.10.2015 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 02.02.2016 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 04-07-

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID REPLY NOTICE DATED 17-06-

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 04/07/2016, EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 4/09/2016 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WP(C) 10390/2024 DATED 18/03/2024 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE