BIJU CHACKO Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, MINING AND GEOLOGY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Third writ petitioner was granted a quarrying permit by the Geologist, Department of Mining and Geology, Ernakulam to extract and remove 200 M.T. of laterite from an area of 15 cents of land comprised in Survey No.296/19 of Aikkaranadu Sough Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk. Permit was valid up to 4-5-2004. Later a mass petition was received by the Geologist from the residents of Kavanmukal Colony of Poothrukka Panchayat Ward No.X and also from few others. Prima facie Geologist felt that the grievance raised by them was genuine, consequently quarrying permit was suspended on 21-4-2004. In the meantime, writ petitioners approached this court and filed WP(C) No. 14002 of 2004 and this court vide judgment dated 29-06-2004 directed the Geologist to take a final decision on objections filed. Objections were heard and the Geologist passed an order dated 27-4-2004 stating as follows:

(2.) Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners Sri. Sheji P. Abraham submitted that after having satisfied that the petitioner is eligible to get the licence for quarrying from an area of 15 cents Geologist is not justified in imposing a condition that he shall not use mechanised method for quarrying laterite. Counsel submitted Rules permit him to do quarrying using mechanised method since quarrying of laterite manually is not being done at present. Counsel also submitted, after having received an amount of Rs.5000/- from the petitioners there is no justification in imposing such a condition.

(3.) Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submitted that before granting the licence complaints of the residents were not examined. Geologist after making an on the spot inspection was convinced of the grievance of the residents of the locality and thereafter imposed the condition for quarrying by cutting laterite manually and not by employing mechanised methods. Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners brought to our knowledge a decision of this court reported in Sivadas v. Geologist, M & G Department, 2003 (2) KLT 312 and submitted that revenue authorities have no authority to question or impose restrictions on the licence issued by the Geologist for quarrying sand from land privately owned.