RAJMOHAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The attempt made by a person to commercially exploit a granite rock stretch extending to 3.64 acres of land in Vadasserikkara Village in Pathanamthitta District lying at a high elevation from the public road beneath it, by extracting granite stones and crushing the same in a metal crusher (rock crusher) has given rise to this Original Petition filed as a Public Interest Litigation. The granite rock stretch lying as a hillock is commonly known by the name 'Kompanoli paramada' (for short "the paramada").

(2.) Petitioners, three in number, have filed this O.P. alleging that the 10th respondent has illegally established an industrial unit consisting of a quarry to extract and collect granite stones and a metal crusher unit (for short "the crusher") in the paramada causing serious hazard to the life and property of the petitioners and 400 other families residing in the nearby locality. It is the specific case of the petitioners that the 10th respondent has not obtained necessary permits, licences and no objection certificates which are mandatorily required under different enactments regulating the running of granite quarry and crusher. The petitioners have prayed for a declaration that the blasting operations carried on in the quarry and running of the crusher by the 10th respondent without proper and valid permits, licences and no objection certificates are illegal and violative of the fundamental rights under Art.19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution of India of the petitioners and others living in the nearby locality as they cause serious hazard to their life and property. The petitioners have also prayed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to restrain the 10th respondent from carrying on of the activities in question without obtaining all the required permits, licences and no objection certificates and without strictly complying with the terms and conditions contained in such permits and licences issued to him. Further directions have also been prayed for to compel respondents 1 to 9 to take all steps necessary to ensure that all operations in the quarry and crusher by the 10th respondent are carried on only on the basis of valid and proper permits and licences and to stop such activities immediately on violation of any of the requirements of law. On the conclusion of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a statement in the concluding portion of which it has been stated thus:

(3.) The facts and circumstances to the extent relevant as disclosed in the pleadings of the parties are thus: First petitioner is the Pathanamthitta Mandalam Secretary of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and an active worker of the Bharathiya Janatha Party. He is also a resident of the Vadasserikkara Village. He is allegedly an active member of the Paristhithy Samrakshana Samithy and an active participant of the Pourasamithy stated to have been formed by the local people to agitate against the disastrous consequences of the quarry and crusher established by the 10th respondent. Second petitioner is a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste and is stated to be the Secretary of the Kerala Pulaya Mahasabha. He is alleged to be residing within 5 metres of the Paramada in a small plot of land assigned to him by the Government. Similarly the third petitioner is also alleged to be residing within 30 metres from the paramada in question. While petitioners 2 and 3 have filed the O.P. in the individual capacity, petitioner No. 1 has filed this O.P. on his own behalf and on behalf of the people of the locality affected by the adverse consequences of running the quarry and crusher in violation of the legal requirements contained in the various enactments regulating the conduct of such quarries and crushers.