LAWS(KER)-2017-12-93

MATHEW JOSEPH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On December 07, 2017
MATHEW JOSEPH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash exts.P5 and P6, whereby the request made by the petitioner to respondents 3 and 2 respectively, to grant permission to the petitioner to provide water supply after carrying out necessary construction to preserve water in the quarry operated by the petitioner, is declined. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

(2.) Petitioner was granted quarrying rights over an area of 0.4047 hectares in Re-survey No.286 of Padinharethara Village in Vythiri Taluk, Wayanad District, as per a lease agreement dated 03.12.1997, evident from Ext.P1. Quarrying operations were being carried out by the petitioner till 10.02.2014, however, Ext.P2 notification dated 10.02.2014 was issued under Sec.3(2) of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 [Act 21 of 2005] was issued. While Ext.P2 proposes to vest certain parcels of land in Re-survey No.286, the exact extent and boundaries of lands so vested have not been physically marked out till date. Ext.P2 is under challenge before this Court.

(3.) It is the submission of the petitioner that, quarrying operations carried out, pursuant to Ext.P1 lease, created a crater in which water would seep in and collect. However, as the crater is open from one end, water will remain there only up to a certain depth, and it will overflow downwards thereafter. Petitioner as well as the local people, mostly tribals, use this limited amount of water for their daily purposes. It is also submitted that, Wayanad district is facing acute drought situations for the past two years. Under these circumstances, if the petitioner is permitted to construct a tank by making use of the pits, it will be helpful to the people residing in the locality. It is further submitted that, petitioner is prepared to bear the expenses for the construction. With that intent in mind, petitioner has submitted Exts.P3 and P4 before 2nd and 3 rd respondents respectively.