PLAKKATTU GRANITES (P) LTD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Official apathy is writ large in the above case which facilitated, wanton illegal quarrying being let off without any penalty; if the allegations are true. The appellant who obtained quarrying leases is alleged to have carried out illegal quarrying from an area in which there was no lease granted, against which proceedings were initiated and concluded. In appeal, the proceedings were set aside but denovo consideration was directed. The further proceedings carried out with inordinate delay and without complying with the appellate order as also the provisions in the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1967 ('KMMC Rules' for brevity) was under challenge.

(2.) The learned Single Judge found that Ext.P9 is a notice and the petitioner had every opportunity to file objections, which opportunity they did not avail of. Instead, the petitioner preferred Ext.P10 review before the Government, which could only be treated as an appeal. Reading Ext.P11 order it was found that the State Government had initiated the action after issuing notice to the petitioner and conducted site inspection. Exts.P10 and P11 were found to have been properly initiated and passed after assimilating the situation in detail. On these findings, the writ petition was dismissed. An order on consequential recovery action Ext.P9 was challenged in W.P(C) No.8872 of 2018 which also stood dismissed. Review petitions were filed against the common judgment. The review against the judgment in W.P(C)No.25012/2013 stood dismissed. The review from the judgment in W.P(C)No.8872/2018 stood disposed of by Ext.R8(a) order granting liberty to take all contentions against the RR notice before the Revenue Recovery Officer. The further proceedings pursuant to Ext.R8(a) order is challenged in the writ petition from which WA 682/2021 arises and the judgment in W.P(C)No.25012/2013 is challenged in W.A 1136/2020.

(3.) It is appropriate that we first consider the appeal filed first in point of time. We have heard learned Senior Counsel Sri.P.Raveendran instructed by Sri.Enoch David Simon Joel, for the appellant and Sri. Hanil Kumar M.H learned Special Government Pleader (Revenue) for the State.