IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25587 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ REMA.B., MEENATHILPARAMBIL HOUSE ERIKKAVUMURI, KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE KUMARAPURAM. 2. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KARTHIKAPPALLY. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM 4. STATE REP. BY SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIATE TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 25587 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 26th August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of 70 cents of land wherein there is a pond. With the financial assistance from the Marine Products Export Development Authority, the petitioner started prawn farming in the pond. During monsoon, the protective bund was washed away in flash floods necessitating reconstruction of the bund. The petitioner was doing the same by de-silting the pond itself with a motor pump. When this year, the petitioner started construction of the protective bund with the sand from the pond, the Village Officer intervened and directed the petitioner to stop mining of sand. The petitioner therefore seeks the following relief: “ Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st and 2nd respondent not to interfere in the re-construction of the bund of the pond in the property owned by the petitioner lying in Accordingly,. No. 543/3/5 of Kumarapuram Village.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. The petitioner has sufficiently proved before me by producing certificate from the MPEDA to the effect that she has obtained financial assistance from the MPEDA for doing prawn fishing in the pond. That being so, it is necessary for the petitioner to protect the prawn farming by constructing appropriate protective bund to keep prawns inside the pond itself. Necessarily, she has to do the same with the sand mined from the pond itself, which cannot be considered as illegal sand mining. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the W.P.C. No. 25587/2008. -: 2 :- respondents not to interfere with the construction of the bund so long as the petitioner does not take the sand outside the premises but only uses the same in the construction of the protective bund. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.