IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 W.A.No. 1759 of 2008 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19618/2008 DATED 30/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- SHARAFUDIN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED HANEEFA, PADINJARE PALAMOODU, THEKKUMBHAGATHU CHERRY, KOTTAPPURAM VILLAGE, SOUTH PARAVUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REFVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOLLAM TALUK. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHIRAKKARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 1759 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 16th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. This writ appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.19618 of 2008 dated 30th June, 2008. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has only directed the the 4th respondent, namely the Village Officer, to transmit all the papers relating to the case to the Revenue Divisional Officer and has further issued a direction to the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is the correctness or otherwise of the said order is called in question by the petitioner in this writ appeal. (2) Ext.P2 is the stop memo issued by the 4th respondent Village Officer on the ground that the appellant/petitioner is excavating sand without obtaining appropriate permission from the competent authority as envisaged under the provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967. (3) The appellant contends that the 4th respondent does not have jurisdiction to issue Ext.P2 stop memo. Further it is stated that the appellant is not excavating any sand, but is only flattening the land for the purpose of making construction. W.A.No.1759 of 2008 2 (4) The learned Single Judge has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. He has only stated that the 4th respondent Village Officer would transmit all the papers including Ext.P2 stop memo before the Revenue Divisional Officer and has further directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the case of the appellant and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. That also includes the plea of the appellant, that, the 4th respondent, namely the Village Officer, has no jurisdiction to issue the stop memo under the provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Since the entire issue is now going to be decided by the Revenue Divisional Officer after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant, in our opinion, it may not be necessary for us to interfere with the orders passed by the learned Single Judge. (5) Accordingly, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE vns