SAJI KAVALAM Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court challenging Ext.P7 stop memo and also seeks a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 application for renewal of licence from the local authority. On account of Ext. P7 he is unable to operate his quarry is the complaint.

(2.) EXT .P7 came to be issued based on instructions issued by the Mining and Geology Director on 19.2.2014. It seems that certain complaints were filed by an organisation in the area to the Minister for Industries, who had directed the matter to be enquired into. It is on that basis stop memos were issued to all the quarries in the locality. The petitioner has a case that he has obtained all valid licence/permission for conducting the quarry and while issuing stop memo to other illegal quarry operators, petitioner's quarry was also issued with Ext.P7. Ext.P10 is a report by the Geologist to the Director, Mining of Geology Directorate indicating that the petitioner is having a valid licence/permissions for conducting the quarrying activity.

(3.) THE learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would however submit that Ext.P6, application to renew the quarrying permit has been filed as early as on 11.2.2014. In so far as the same has not been rejected, in accordance with the Rules, the petitioner has a deemed licence. That apart, the Panchayat has not considered the same on account of the pendency of the stop memo issued by the Geologist.