K. KAMIL Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is challenging Ext. P13 order passed by the Director of Mining and Geology by which he was directed to remit a sum of Rs. 4,90,500/-, towards the royalty for the sand extracted in excess of the permit granted to him.

(2.) The petitioner was having a permit for extraction and removal of sand from 1.0465 hectares of his own property in Survey No. 363-1, 363-4 and 363-5, in Kadinamkulam Village, based on the no objection certificate Ext. P1. This permit was given subject to the conditions stipulated in it. According to the petitioner, the permit expired on 06.08.2005. By Ext. P3 notice dated 06.08.2005, the Senior Geologist directed the petitioner to show cause against the proposal to initiate proceedings under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1967 (for short, "the 1967 Rules") as it was found that he was involved in illegal mining of sand from the property in Re-survey No. 363/3-1 on the basis of the permit issued to him for mining of sand from the property in Re-survey No. 363-1, 363-4 and 363-5. Petitioner thereupon submitted Ext. P4 reply dated 16.08.2005 denying the allegations of encroachment and violation of the 1967 Rules and informing that he was mining sand from his own land in accordance with the permit and he had already informed his contractor to remove the implements for mining from 15.07.2005 onwards and that he will not be responsible for any mining activities in the said property. By Ext. P5 notice issued on 17.10.2005, the petitioner was again asked to show cause against the action proposed for the violation of the 1967 Rules, rejecting his explanation furnished on 16.08.2005, because he was convinced of the violations found in the joint inspection held on 12.9.2005, along with the Village Officer. It was stated that sand was found removed by the petitioner, beyond the prescribed depth of 1.5 meters. According to the petitioner, on receipt of Ext. P5 notice, he personally appeared before the Senior Geologist and explained that there was no illegal quarrying.

(3.) However, the Director of Mining and Geology issued Ext. P6 notice dated 01.04.2006, based on the report of the District Geologist, dated 13.01.2006, as to the removal of 49050 metric tonnes of excess sand by petitioner in violation of permit. Petitioner was asked to show cause why he should not remit a sum of Rs. 1,03,00,500/- towards the price of the sand illegally sold by him, including the royalty charges of Rs. 9,81,000. On receipt of the same the petitioner submitted Ext. P7 representation stating that the finding that he had illegally removed 49050 metric tonnes of sand was totally incorrect and that he had already paid royalty towards the sand removed by him, on the basis of the permit issued to him. He further stated that variations occurred in maintaining the depth of 1.5 meters were already rectified by filling red earth, as directed by the District Geologist. He further stated that no action was taken against others who had removed sand illegally. He stated that he was developing his property for agricultural purposes.