IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31825 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- OMANAKUTTAN.K.V, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. VELUMPAN, KALAPPURAYIL VEEDU, KALLIMEL.P.O, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, MAVELIKKARA. 3. GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, ALAPPUZHA. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, VETTIYAR VILLAGE OFFICE, MAVELIKKARA. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.31825 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner is challenging revenue recovery proceedings initiated against him through Ext.P2 and P3 notices, for realisation of Rs.1,68,733/-, being the amount imposed as royalty under the provisions of the Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules. According to the petitioner, before initiating proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act he was served with a notice proposing imposition of penalty and he had submitted objections to the said notice. But grievance of the petitioner is that he was not issued with any order demanding payment of royalty. 2. It is noticed that under the provisions of the Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules, the petitioner is provided with a statutory remedy by way of appeal against imposition of royalty. Therefore I am of the view that the matter can be disposed of relegating the petitioner to resort to the statutory remedy of appeal available under the Rules. 3. If the petitioner approaches the 3rd respondent with a request, copy of proceedings/demand if any issued with respect W.P.(C).31825/09-W 2 to fixation of liability on him shall be issued to him without any delay. The petitioner can file appeal against such proceedings on getting copy from the 2nd respondent. The petitioner can also seek interim relief regarding stay before the appellate authority on filing of statutory appeal. 4. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to direct the respondents to keep in abeyance recovery of the amounts covered under Ext.P2 and P3 for a period of two months, in order to facilitate the petitioner to resort to the remedy by way of appeal. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb