CHELAKKARA GRANITES Vs. VILLAGEOFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner states that, by Ext. P1 composite consent deed, the owners of properties referred to therein have permitted the petitioner to extract granite stones from their properties and accordingly the petitioner applied for revenue certificates including attested sketch, possession certificate, demarcation certificate and non assignment certificate for the purpose of applying for mineral concession. The application for attested sketch was rejected by the Tahsildar, the 2nd respondent by Ext. P7 communication stating that the land in respect of which the application has been submitted forms part of a land once exempted under the provisions of Sec. 81 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and therefore in view of the circular issued by the Land Board Secretary based on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.A. No. 7699-7700/2019 dtd. 30/9/2019 [Nazar K.H. v. Mathew K.Jacob (2019 (4) KHC 919)], quarrying operations are not permitted in plantations exempted under the provision of Sec. 81 of the Act. The petitioner submits that non-issuance of possession certificate, demarcation certificate, attested sketch, etc; on a premise that the applied land forms part of a land once exempted under the provisions of Sec. 81 of the Act is illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner relies on Exts. P8 to P11 unreported judgments of this Court which according to the petitioner are passed under similar circumstances wherein this Court directed the revenue authorities to issue revenue certificates.

(2.) Heard Sri. Philip J. Vettikattu the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jaffer Khan, learnd senior Government pleader for the respondents.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no prohibition in using an exempted land for a different purpose under the KLR Act. The learned senior Government pleader argued in support of the impugned order.