IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2008 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 30836 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.MANOJ, 'SARANGI', P.O.KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR SRI.T.P.RAMACHANDRAN (THACHETH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHANGAROTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHANGAROTH.P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE GEOLOGIST, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.S.K.SAJU FOR R1 SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.R. SABU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 30836/2008. ------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR LICENCE. EXT.P2 AGREEMENT DT. 4-7-2008. EXT.P3 APPLICATION DT. 10-7-2008. EXT.P4 RESOLUTION DT. 6-8-2008. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 30836 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd December, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging Ext. P4 decision of the 1st respondent-Panchayat, whereby the Panchayat has rejected the application of the petitioner for a no objection certificate for conducting trade in sand for production before the 2nd respondent- Geologist in support of an application for dealer's licence under Rule 48A of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. The petitioner was forced to apply for no objection certificate only because the 2nd respondent-Geologist insisted on the same and not pursuant to any statutory obligation in that regard. The petitioner submits that there is no rule prescribing production of a no objection certificate for applying for a dealer's licence under Rule 48A of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Further, he also submits that the reasons stated by the Panchayat for refusing the no objection certificate are also not sustainable. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “a) Quash Ext. P4 decision of the 1st respondent Panchayat by the issue of a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction. b) direct the 1st respondent to issue the No Objection Certificate sought for by the petitioner as per Ext. P3 application. c) further direct the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P1 application and to pass necessary orders thereon without insisting for any No Objection Certificate from the Panchayat.” 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Panchayat stating that if the petitioner is permitted to trade in sand in the locality, it would affect the business of the Panchayat, which is also engaged in the business of mining sand and selling the same. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned W.P.C. No. 30836/08 -: 2 :- counsel for the Panchayat as also the learned Government appearing for the 2nd respondent. 4. After hearing, I am satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to succeed on both points. Learned Government Pleader has not been able to point out any provision of law which mandates production of a no objection certificates from the Panchayat in applying for dealer's licence under Rule 48A of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Further, no law confers monopoly on the Panchayat for dealing in sand. Any person who desires to engage in the business of trading in sand can apply for a dealer's licence under Rule 48A. In that view, the Panchayat cannot object to the petitioner's obtaining a licence to deal in sand and no NOC is also required from the Panchayat. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P1 application filed by the petitioner for dealer's licence under Rule 48A of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, without insisting on a no objection certificate from the Panchayat, if the petitioner satisfies all other conditions. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/