DANISH JOSEPH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court impugning Ext.P5 minutes of the hearing recorded by the 3rd respondent - Deputy Collector (LR), Ernakulam, asserting that, as per the directions in Ext.P2 judgment, it is only the District Collector who could have conducted such hearing and not any other Authority. The petitioner prays that, therefore, Ext.P5 be quashed and the 2nd respondent - District Collector be directed to comply with Ext.P2 judgment, taking note of Ext.P3 report and Regulation 164 of Metaliferous Mine Regulations, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

(2.) In response, the learned Special Government Pleader - Sri.Hanil Kumar, submitted that Ext.P5 has been recorded by the 3 rd respondent - Deputy Collector due to an inadvertant error, since the direction in Ext.P2 judgment was that the 2nd respondent - District Collector will personally hear all the parties. He says, therefore, that Ext.P5 will not be acted upon and the District Collector will hear all the parties, including the petitioner herein, before any further orders are issued on the application of the 5 th respondent.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel, Sri.K.P.Satheeshan, instructed by Sri.Mohan Das, learned counsel for the 5 th respondent, submitted that attempt of the petitioner herein is vitiated by malice since he has been filing writ petitions after writ petitions against his client merely to ensure that he is obstructed from carrying on legally sanctioned activities. The learned Senior Counsel prays that, therefore, the 2 nd respondent - District Collector be directed to complete the proceedings as per Ext.P2 judgment, within a short time frame to be fixed by this Court.