IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH OCTOBER 2011 / 3RD KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1596 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.26274/2011 Dated 19/10/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): / PETITIONER -------------- SINDHU SOJI, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O.SOJI, THEKKANATH HOUSE, EAST CHERANALLUR (PO) KOOVAPADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY RESPONDENT(S): / RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. THE GEOLOGIST, MINING & GEOLOGY DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD (PO), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 030. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.2, COMMERCIAL TAX MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 002. 3. N.KRISHNA MOORTHY, THE GEOLOGIST, MINING & GEOLOGY DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 030. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, MR.GEORGE MECHERIL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.NO.1596/2011 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-1 : COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE HEAP OF SAND LYING IN THE STOCKYARD OF the APPELLANT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag.CJ. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. .................................................................... W.A. No.1596 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 25th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, Ag.CJ. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to interfere with the matter on account of availability of alternate remedy by way of appeal to the appellant. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. It is seen that appellant's application for renewal of dealers licence for trading in sand is rejected vide Ext.P10 for the reason that the representation submitted for renewal of permit is highly belated. The appellant's case is that the delay happened on account of time taken for getting registration under the KVAT Act for sale of sand as a trader. It is seen that the application is rejected for the reason that it is belated and it is not in the prescribed form. We feel if application for W.A.No.1596/2011 2 renewal of licence is not submitted in time then the application so filed should be treated as an original application for grant of fresh licence and the Geologist has to consider the eligibility and grant it, if found eligible. We, therefore, allow the Writ Appeal by vacating the judgment of the learned Single Judge and by directing the Geologist to issue chalan for the appellant to remit fees and to file application in the prescribed form which should be considered as an application for fresh licence, if time for renewal is over and there is no provision to condone delay. It is for the Geologist to consider eligibility and if found eligible to grant licence to the appellant. This Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg