IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 29975 of 2008(R) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- ANTHONY, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.DEVASSY, CHETTIKULAM HOUSE, KODASSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT THRISSUR. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK IRINJALAKUDA. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, KODASSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 29975 OF 2008 R -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th December, 2008 JUDGMENT Prayer in the Writ Petition is as follows: “Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 within such time as may be fixed by this Honourable Court and until then stay all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P2 and P3.” 2. Petitioner had approached this Court earlier and obtained Ext.P5 Judgment. Therein, this Court held as follows: “If, according to the petitioner, there has not been any quantification as now contended by him, it is open to the petitioner to approach the respondents 1 to 3 with a representation in that behalf, in which event, they shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders.” 3. According to petitioner, petitioner filed Ext.P6 representation. The first respondent filed a Statement and produced Exts.R1(a) to R1(d). Under Ext.R1(c), according to WPC.29975/08 R 2 the learned Government Pleader, there has been a quantification of the liability. It is this amount which is demanded under Exts.P2 and P3. In fact, there is no challenge to Exts.P2 and P3 as such in this Writ Petition. There is no challenge to Ext.R1(c) either. There is no reference to Ext.R1(c) in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is clearly liable to be dismissed with costs of Rs.2,000/=. Then the learned counsel for petitioner prayed for some time to pay off the amount. He pleaded that the petitioner is only a labourer. While dismissing the Writ Petition with costs of Rs.2,000/= (Rupees Two Thousand), it is only ordered that the proceedings against the petitioner will be kept in abeyance for a period of six weeks from today to enable the petitioner to pay off the entire amount due. Needless to say, any further illegal quarrying which may be indulged by the petitioner, can be made the subject matter of appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Sd/= kbk. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE // True Copy // PS to Judge