IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 1729 of 2008(E) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- T.MATHEW ABRAHAM, PROPRIETOR, SOUTHERN ROCK AND AGGREGATE MINING COMPANY, JANDAIK, CHERUKULANGI, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. TAHSILDAR, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.R. JAYAKRISHNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1729/2008-E: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 30/12/1998. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENSE DTD. 21/02/2007 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2.A: COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED TO THE EXPERT. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 08/01/2008. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE TAHSILDAR DTD. 07/01/2008 NO: B4/5003/07. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.1729 of 2008-E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this 21st December, 2010. J U D G M E N T The writ petitioner is operating a quarry at Ranni in Pathanamthitta district. According to the petitioner, he had been operating the same after obtaining due licence from the authorities in accordance with the licensing conditions. On 6.1.2008 an explosion occurred near the quarry. The Tahsildar, Ranni made an enquiry and filed Ext.P4 report whereby it was mentioned that because of the explosion the nearby houses sustained damages and the matter requires further investigation. Basing upon Ext.P4, the Sub Divisional Officer, Pathanamthitta issued Ext.P3 order. It contains two parts. One part appears to be under Section 133 of the Crl.P.C. whereby the writ petitioner was directed to close the quarry. The second part contains a temporary injunction under Sec.142(1) of the Crl.P.C. directing the writ petitioner to close the quarry and its activities with WP(C).No.1729 of 2008-E. 2 immediate effect. Assailing Ext.P3, this writ petition was filed. 2. While admitting this writ petition an interim stay against the operation of Ext.P3 was granted on 15.1.2008. It is submitted that the interim stay is still in force and the writ petitioner is operating quarry despite Ext.P3 order. It is submitted that the investigation pursuant to Ext.P4 is still going on and final report is yet to be filed. Such being the circumstance, I find no good reason to retain this writ petition and it can be disposed with direction to the respondents to initiate appropriate action against the erring person on completion of investigation on Ext.P4. Till then, the interim stay granted by this Court shall remain in force. In the result, while keeping the order dated 15.1.2008 alive till the final report of investigation in pursuance to Ext.P4, the writ petition is disposed directing the respondents to finish the investigation in pursuance to Ext.P4 at the earliest and initiate appropriate action against the erring person/s. It is made clear that the respondents would be at WP(C).No.1729 of 2008-E. 3 liberty to initiate any action, on the basis of the report of investigation on Ext.P4, including stopping of quarry, if found necessary. P.S.GOPINATHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-