IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2008 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6391 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JUDI VARGHESE, AGED 46, W/O.PALAKKAL VARGHESE, ALOOR VILLAGE DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ALOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.KALLETUMKARA-680 683, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ALOOR VILLAGE OFFICE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 4. ANTHONY, S/O.PALAKKAL THOMA, ALOOR VILLAGE DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No. 6391 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT Under challenge in this writ petition is Ext.P5 order of the Panchayat by which the Panchayat has cancelled Ext.P1 permit which was issued to the petitioner for cutting and removing laterate stone from his property having an extent of 2.18 ares in Survey No.35 of Aloor village . Apart from Ext.P5, the local village officer has also issued Ext.P6 stop memo on the reason that the extraction of stones from the petitioner's property violates the Kerala Land Utilisation Order as well as the Minor Mineral Construction Rules. The Panchayat has filed a detailed counter affidavit justifying Ext.P5. According to the Panchayat, Ext.P1 was a conditional permit which was subject to as many as 5 conditions. The petitioner violated condition Nos. 2, 4 and 5. On account of violation of condition Nos. 2, 4 and 5 in Ext.P1, he has forfeited Ext.P1 permit. 2. I have heard the submissions of Sri.G.Sreekumar, counsel for the petitioner and those of Sri.Philip.T.Varghese, counsel for the WPC.No.6391/08 2 Panchayat. I am of the view that the stand of the Panchayat that Ext.P1 will operate only if the conditions in Ext.P1 are satisfied is reasonable. More over Ext.P6 stop memo had been issued against the petitioner by the Village Officer. In fact Ext.P6 is issued mainly on the reason that mining work is being done without obtaining permit under the Land Utilisation Order and permit from the Geologist. Whether or not these permits are required is a moot question. The petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal against Ext.P5 to the Council of the Panchayat. I relegate the petitioner to that remedy and dispose of the writ petition accordingly. If the petitioner prefers an appeal to the Panchayat council within two weeks from today, the council will seek the views of the Tahsildar, Mukundapuram, hear the petitioner and take a decision on the appeal without undue delay. The appeal if filed within the stipulated time will be decided by the Council of the Panchayat within one month of its registration. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.6391/08 2