VIJU M. ITTOOP Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P21 interim order dated 2.12.2019 in I.A.No.1469/19 in pending Appeal No.680 of 2019 preferred against Ext.P15 order dated 25.9.2019 issued by the fourth respondent - Secretary of Poothrikka Grama Panchayat. As per the provisions of Section 276 of the Panchayat Raj Act, the quarry holder is entitled to approach the Tribunal constituted for adjudication of the controversy.

(2.) Mr.Santhosh Mathew, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that the prime question to be adjudicated by the Tribunal in view of the decisions rendered by this Court in All Kerala River Protection Council, Aluva v. State of Kerala and Others [2015 (2) KHC 359] is as to whether a holder of a quarry licence would be required to obtain environmental clearance, in case of existing lease as on 18.5.2012 or not, where the lease executed between the petitioner and the Government as Ext.P2 is valid for twelve years, i.e, 21st November 2020 and other permissions like consent from the Pollution Control Board as Ext.P4 dated 14.11.2018 valid up to 20th November 2020, Explosive licence as Ext.P5 dated 22.4.2019 valid up to 31 st day of March 2022, Movement Permit as Ext.P6 dated 2.5.2019 and mining plan as Ext.P3.

(3.) It is submitted that all the permissions as required are complied with, however the Assistant Geologist issued Ext.P5 stop memo dated 25.5.2019 which was challenged in this Court in WP(C)No.15110 of 2019 resulting in to an order dated 9th July 2019 in Ext.P9. The matter was referred to Director of Mining and Geology for obtaining the order with regard to the report of the Geologist. The Director, vide his report Ext.P10 dated 24.7.2019 clarified that the report of the Assistant Geologist was not correct however permitted to continue subject to deposit of Rs.33,908/- and that communication is dated 1.8.2019 Ext.P11.