JOSEPH MATHEW Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The constant struggle in today 's world, between development and environment, is once more brought to focus in the instant Writ Petitions. Helpless citizens; neighbouring residents of quarries, the existence of which is imperative for construction activities, the visible face of development; are the petitioners. They are concerned with the alarming damage caused to their property and buildings and assail the functioning of quarries as a complete nuisance to their lives and label them illegal to further buttress their case; by taking up the cause of environment protection too.

(2.) In all the above Writ Petitions there was an interim order granted, staying the operation of the quarry, by the different party respondents in the three Writ Petitions. The first of such orders was issued in W.P.(C) No.25153 of 2015 dated 14.09.2015, wherein a learned Single Judge noticed the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Najeeb M.K. Vs. Shoukath Ali, (2015 (3) KLT 396) and interdicted the quarry operations carried on by the party respondent on the sole ground of the respondent having no Environmental Clearance [for brevity ''EC '']. The very same learned Single Judge passed interim orders in the other Writ Petitions also, obviously, for reason of the party -respondents therein also not being in possession of EC.

(3.) The respondent in W.P.(C) No.14838 of 2016 took up the matter in appeal, wherein it was argued that though G.O.(P) No.144/2015/ID dated 5.10.2015 has been struck down by a Division Bench of this Court in Nature Lovers ' Forum Vs. State of Kerala (2016 (1) KLT 75); the Government had undertook before the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.30103 of 2015 that they would renew all quarrying licenses. The Division Bench, noticing the contentions of both parties, left liberty to the parties to move for necessary modification of the interim order and the Writ Appeal stood dismissed. Hence, all the above Writ Petitions are before this Court with the applications for modification of the interim order and on consent of parties, the Writ Petitions itself were heard.