IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 2ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 12341 of 2006(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- RAJAPPAN, AGED 56, S/O.PADMANABHAN, KOCHUVEETTIL VADAKKETHIL, PAVUMBA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM) RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM. 3. THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, KOLLAM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KARUNAGAPPALLY.P.O. 5. P.ARAVINDAKSHAN, KOCHUVILAYIL HOUSE, KAITHACKAL, ANAYADI.P.O, KOLLAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.12341/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT. 1.3.05 ISSUED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFOCER MALSIA KARSHAKA VIKASANA AGENCY KOLLAM. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 2.3.05. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 1.3.06 IN WPC. NO.6122/06. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 8.3.06 BEARING NO.A2046/05 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE PERMIT NO.442/2005/06/DOQ/MM/BC/S2/837/2006 DT. 24.3.06 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE ORDER NOL.11-19547/2006 DT. 16.4.06 PASSED BY IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE PERMIT NO.11/2006-07/DOQ/MM/BC/S2/1317/2006 DT. 26.4.06 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.12341 of 2006 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The challenge is on Ext.P6 order passed by the District Collector. It is seen that the same is only an interim order staying the order passed by the Geologist. It cannot be disputed that under the Minor Mineral Concession Rules, the competent authority is the Geologist and that authority has issued permit even after Ext.P6 as per Ext.P7. However, the same is not implemented in view of Ext.P6 order passed by the first respondent. The main contention is that the first respondent does not have jurisdiction to pass such order. Be that as it may, in view of the intervening developments it is only appropriate that the matter is considered afresh and final orders passed by the first respondent with notice to the petitioner, 5th respondent and any other affected party. Accordingly there will be a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the matter finally in the light also of the developments referred to above with notice W.P(C) No.12341 of 2006 -:2:- to the petitioner and the 5th respondent within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) ahg. KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ----------------------------------- W.P(C).No.12341 of 2006 ----------------------------------- JUDGMENT 24th September, 2008