BIJO JOSE Vs. STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present appeal filed under Sec. 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, the appellant/original petitioner has challenged the judgment dtd. 3/2/2020 in W.P.(C) No.2650 of 2018 by which the learned single Judge has refused to entertain the petition seeking a writ of mandamus, declaring that the 5th respondent is not entitled to conduct quarrying operation on the basis of the Environmental Clearance Certificate issued on 29/11/2017 by the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority, Kerala (SEIAA), since the certificate ought to have been issued by the Central Government in terms of the notification dtd. 14/3/2017 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Union of India. The other prayer is for a writ of mandamus commanding the concerned District Collector as well as the Geologist to see that the quarrying operations are not continued unless and until the appraisal is done and permission granted by the Expert Appraisal Committee and Regulatory Authority at the Central level.

(2.) In response to the notice issued by the learned single Judge, all the respondents filed their counter affidavits and opposed the grant of reliefs prayed by the appellant. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the documents on record, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) The case put forth by the appellant is as under: The appellant, along with his family, is residing in the property comprised in Re.Sy.No.28 in Nediyenga Village in Taliparamba Taluk in Kannur District since 1969 and is carrying out agricultural operations on the said land. It is the case of the appellant that the entire area surrounding his land is agricultural land and an ecologically and environmentally sensitive one. It is the case of the appellant that private respondent No.5 started granite quarrying operations in the adjacent property and the house of the appellant was damaged and his agricultural operations were affected due to the blasting of rocks. Therefore, the appellant was left with no alternative, but to file a writ petition before this court, being W.P.(C)No.27189 of 2016. By an interim order dtd. 17/8/2016, this court restrained the 5th respondent from conducting mining operations and by judgment dtd. 7/12/2016, the learned single Judge restrained the 5th respondent from conducting quarrying operations without environmental clearance and without permit/licence/lease obtained under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015.