VIJAY KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is a licensed brick -kiln owner of Nalanda district. He has come to this Court with a grievance that in Nalanda district there are large number of illegally operating brick -kiln to the knowledge of the district authorities and the Mining Department. The district authorities for the State purchase bricks from these illegal brick -kilns and thus legitimize them. No steps are taken to stop them.

(2.) MR . D.K. Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexure 7 being a letter of the Deputy Collector, Nalanda, under Memo No. 5158, dated 9.12.2006. The letter is shocking to the Court. The letter admits that in view of information available there are over 170 brick -kilns operating in the district and only 26 have licenses. Even in respect of licensed brickkiln the Mining Department has reported that only one license is valid (this is of the petitioner alone). What is shocking is that the petitioner filed application under Right to Information Act with regard to number of brick -kiln operating and information available with the State in this regard for Nalanda. Information was supplied listing large number of organizations operating out brick -kilns for manufacturing bricks but apparently none of them have license. This gives credence to the submission of the petitioner that ail these units which have been operating for several years are hand in glove with the authorities, who are to implement law and are being permitted to operate without complying with legal formality and without obtaining a license and carrying out illegally mining activity. The scale at which this operation is carried out under the nose of the officers both of the district and the Mining Department is a matter of concern. The present Collec -tor -cum -District Magistrate has issued direction to the Governmental authorities not to purchase bricks from unlicensed brick manufacturers . Unfortunately the petitioner feels that the directions are not being implemented as his business, being the sole licensee, has not increased though building activity continues, which is indicative that purchases are still being made from unlicensed brick -kiln owners. In the counter affidavit filed, it is evident that authori ties are only "trying" to prevent such illegal operations. What surprises this court more is that the State has filed list of such illegal operations for not only one year but for several years, still the officers of the Mining Department have not chosen to take any action against those persons. This is a matter of grave concern.

(3.) LET the District Magistrate -cum -Collector, Nalanda and the District Mining Officer, Nalanda file separate detailed reports in this regard to this Court alongwith specific action taken report in regard to illegally established brick kilns in the district. Such a report must reach this Court within four weeks from today supported by their affidavits.