IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 7862 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ V.G.AMBUJAKSHAN NAIR, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, AGED 50 YEARS, BUSINESS, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, VADAKARA P.O., VELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686605. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VELLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 7862 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 17th March, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was granted Exhibit P1 quarrying permit for removing 1000 MT of ordinary sand from his property having an extent of 10 ares of land comprised in Sy.,No.124/13B of Naduvila village, Vaikom Taluk. Clause No.12 of Exhibit P1 permit reads as follows: The permit shall be surrendered to the issuing authority on the expiry of validity of the permit or immediately after the date on which entire quantity of minor mineral sanctioned as per the permit has been extracted from the area, whichever is earlier, for cancellation and return. 2. It seems to be fairly admitted in the writ petition that the petitioner has not filled or reclaimed the land. In fact it is admitted in the writ petition that a pond came into being on removal of the sand and petitioner started fish cultivation in the said land and infraction of the conditions of the permit seems to be practically admitted. W.P ( C) No. 7862 of 2008 2 3. Exhibits P2 and P3 demand notices came to be issued by the 3rd respondent seeking to recover the charges by way of expenses for filling up the pit. According to the petitioner, Exhibits P2 and P3 are illegal. They have made huge demands unrelated to the actual incident. Petitioner is willing to fill up the pit, if time is granted. 4. Subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, an affidavit has been filed by the petitioner on 10.3.2008. Paragraph 3 of the said affidavit reads as follows: “It is submitted that I am ready to fill the pit in my property in Sy.No.124/13B of Naduvila village, Vaikom Taluk at my own expense if a breathing time is granted to me. Hence it is highly necessary to grant time up to 31.12.2008 to fill the said pit in my land. Otherwise it will cause much hardship and injury to me. I promise to fill the pit in my property in Sy.No.124/13/B on or before 31.12.2008. I am filing this affidavit as per the direction of this Honourable Court. 5. In my view, petitioner should approach the competent authority under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967. Petitioner expresses his willingness to fill up the pond, which has come into being in the land covered by Exhibit P1 consequent upon the quarrying Petitioner has filed Exhibit P5 representation before the 2nd respondent. W.P ( C) No. 7862 of 2008 3 In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: i) Petitioner may file a representation before the District Geologist, within three weeks from today with specific reference as to his willingness to fill up the pit in its entirety in reclaiming the land in terms of Clause 16 of Exhibit P1. ii) If such a request is received by the District Geologist within the three weeks time mentioned above, he shall inspect the land and pass an order fixing the time frame for filling up the land. iii) Petitioner shall be bound to fill up the land within the time so granted by the 2nd respondent. Any failure on the part of the petitioner to do so will enable the 2nd respondent to take steps to fill up the land or do whatever is necessary to see that the reclamation is completed and then realize the expenses from the petitioner after due quantification with notice to the petitioner. iv) Enforcement of recovery notice shall be kept in W.P ( C) No. 7862 of 2008 4 abeyance till orders are passed by the 2nd respondent in the manner aforementioned. v) It is made clear that the enforcement of the recovery notice shall, thereafter, be subject to the proceedings to be taken in the manner aforementioned. vi) Second respondent shall pass orders on the petitioner’s request for time to fill up the pit and reclaim the land without delay, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of a representation from the petitioner. Petitioner shall positively produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent on or before 2.4.2008. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 7862 of 2008 5 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER W.P ( C) No. 7862 of 2008 6 25th May, 2007 Common issues are raised for consideration in all these writ petitions. Reference is made to the facts in Writ Petition No.4562/2008 for the sake of convenience.