JACOB GEORGE Vs. TOMY ABRAHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment in W.P(C) No.23849 of 2014 as affirmed in R.P. No.872 of 2016 filed by the appellant as review petitioner. The Writ Petition was originally disposed of as per judgment dated 17.08.2016. The appellant who was not a party to the Writ Petition filed the Review Petition with leave of the Court. As per order dated 18.10.2016, the Review Petition was dismissed.

(2.) Writ Petition was filed by the 1 st respondent herein essentially seeking permission to remove the materials which were quarried during the period 2012-13 and audited by the department of Mining and Geology as per Exts.P14 and P15 audit reports. As per judgment dated 17.08.2016, prayer was granted permitting the writ petitioner to remove 5,034.500 tonnes in terms of Ext.P15. The appellant a non-party to the writ petition filed R.P. No.872 of 2016 seeking review of the judgment on the ground that the writ petitioner had conducted quarrying operations without 'Licence under the Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories Rules, 1996' (hereinafter referred to as "the D&O licence") framed under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the writ petitioner was not entitled to remove the materials unauthorisedly quarried. The Review Petition was dismissed confirming the judgment as originally passed in the Writ Petition.

(3.) Writ Petitioner had quarrying licence for different periods from 08.02.2010. The issue at hand pertains to the period 2012-13. The allegation of the appellant is that, for the said period, the writ petitioner did not possess the D&O licence without which he could not have conducted quarrying operations. Since the quarrying operations conducted without the said licence were illegal in terms of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short, "the MMDR Act"), the minerals, tools, equipments, vehicles, etc., are to be confiscated. Therefore, according to the appellant, the quarrying operations conducted by the writ petitioner without the D&O licence would be an illegal activity and therefore, in terms of sub-sec.(4) of Sec.21 of the MMDR Act, confiscation is to be made in respect of the minerals and equipments and he cannot be permitted to remove the illegally quarried material. In substance, the contention is that for the violation of the D&O licence, the writ petitioner should face the consequence under the MMDR Act.