SATHEESH JOSEPH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P11 order of the 2nd respondent/Geologist, which rejected petitioner's application for issuance of movement permit and transit passes. The rejection was premised on an interpretation to Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 (for short 'K.M.M.C. Rules') to the effect that the exemption granted therein applies only to digging of foundation of buildings; and not for construction of building, as such. On such interpretation, the petitioner was required to produce environmental clearance, vide Ext.P11.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner wants to construct six residential villas in the subject property having an extent of one hectare. Harping upon Rule 14(2) of the K.M.M.C. Rules, petitioner applied for movement permit and transit passes, on the premise that, no quarrying permit is required. Learned counsel would submit that, the language employed in Rule 14(2) is "extraction of ordinary earth in connection with the construction and digging of foundation for building that do not require environmental clearance", which necessarily means that extraction of ordinary earth for the purpose of construction of the building also does not require any quarrying permit, provided the building does not require any environmental clearance. Learned counsel then invited the attention of this Court to the Schedule to E.I.A. notification, 2006, particularly to Clause 8(a), which deals with building and construction projects, to point out that, such building or projects where the total built up area is less than 50000 sq. mts. does not require any environmental clearance. Learned counsel would hasten to add that, the requirement of 50000 has since then been amended to 20000 sq. mts. It is the specific case of the petitioner, which finds recognition in Ext.P11 impugned order, that the total built up area of all the six buildings of the petitioner is less than 12500 sq.mts, wherefore, no environmental clearance is required. In such circumstances, the rejection of petitioner's application for movement permit and transit passes, vide Ext.P11, is illegal, is the submission made by the learned counsel. Learned counsel would also clarify that, the application for movement permit and transit passes was initially rejected vide Ext.P7, against which, the petitioner preferred a review vide Ext.P8. Ext.P11 order rejected the review petition. Learned counsel would also submit that, the interpretation sought to be assigned to Rule 14(2), that it applies only to digging of foundation of building is erroneous and misconstrued. Learned counsel would invite the attention of this Court to requirements in amended provision of Rule 14(2) which speaks of plinth area of the ground floor, the open space of the building, dimensioned plan and sectional drawing etc., which would only indicate that Rule 14(2) takes within its sweep construction of building; and not confined to construction of foundation for buildings.