P L MOHANAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus compelling respondents 1 to 3 to render adequate and sufficient police protection to the petitioner and his workers for conducting sand mining from the property having an extent of 66 cents in old survey No.521/3 and 521/4 in R.S.No.111/6-2 Block No.10 of Kuttoor Village, Thiruvalla Taluk on the strength of Ext.P10 permit without any hindrance or obstruction from respondents 4 to 12. Petitioner would contend that under Ext.P10 permission was granted to excavate sand till 20/8/2012 to the extent of one thousand metric ton subject to the conditions and petitioner is prepared to comply with the conditions and therefore, respondents 4 to 12 are not entitled to cause any obstruction and as they threatened to cause obstruction, respondents 1 to 3 are to be directed to render adequate and sufficient police protection.

(2.) THIRD respondent filed a statement through the Government Pleader stating that petitioner had obtained all requisite permissions and licenses from different Government departments and the work initially started could not be continued on account of the physical obstruction caused by the respondents who are political activists and also said to be environmental activists and neighbouring persons. It is also contended that when the workers were obstructed, the petitioner submitted a complaint against respondents 4 to 12 and a detailed enquiry was conducted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Thiruvalla and respondents 4 to 12 were summoned and they stated that no mining work will be allowed in the plot and due to the obstructions, work had been stopped. It is also stated that so far no law and order problem had arisen and if the work is started, respondents are likely to oppose and obstruct the mining operation which will ultimately lead to law and order problem. It is also stated that since the petitioner has obtained necessary licenses, he can conduct quarry operations.

(3.) IN view of the decision of the Apex Court in Deepak Kumar's case (supra) by order dated 26/7/2012, a report from the Senior Environmental Engineer, Pathanamthitta, after inspecting the property covered under Ext.P10, on whether granting permission to remove the sand from the property would cause any environmental problem, in view of the proximity of land to Varattar river was obtained. The report submitted by the Environmental Engineer, Kerala State Pollution Control Board, Pathanamthitta shows that on 8/8/2012 as directed the Environmental Engineer along with Assistant Environmental Engineer, inspected the area covered by Ext.P10 and noted that a stream is flowing on the southern boundary of the proposed sand mining property, and it is seen filled with water weeds. It is also reported that there was different claims whether that stream is Varattar or Anjilikkuzhy thodu and there are six residences and two wells within 25 meters from the boundary of the property covered under Ext.P10. The water table in the area is very high and there are no bunds along the stream or downstream of the proposed land. The Environmental Engineer therefore reported thus;