IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31967 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANIRUDHAN, 55 YEARS, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, CHULLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENGALLUR P.O., THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY JOINT SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES (A) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. GEOLOGIST, O/O. MINING AND GEOLOGY, THRISSUR. BY GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).31967/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. 2. Petitioner extracted clay from his property situated in Chengallur Village in Thrissur District on the strength of Exts.P1 and P2 permits. Later, Ext.P3 notice was issued to the petitioner requiring him to pay an amount of Rs.5,47,000/- as royalty. Challenging Ext.P3, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Government under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Said appeal was disposed of under Ext.P4 order, remanding the matter to the original authority. Ext.P4 has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition contending that a crucial contention raised by him, as regards the jurisdiction of the Geologist to levy penalty on the extraction of clay from the property belonging to the petitioner, has not been considered. W.P.(C).31967/2008 2 3. In my view, it would have been appropriate for the Government to refer to the said contention raised by the petitioner, before taking a decision. 4. In the result, Ext.P4 is set aside. Government is directed to pass fresh order on the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P3 order, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is open to the petitioner to move the appellate authority for appropriate interim orders. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs