IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 8517 of 2009(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAMES MATHAI, S/O. KOSHY MATHAI, MUDIYIL THARAYIL,PUNTHALA.P.O. KULANADA,CHENGANNUR,ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAVEENDRAN SRI.ANIL KUMAR M.SIVARAMAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHENGANNUR. 4. SANTHOSH.S.,S/O.SREEDHARAN, ITAYILAPARAMBIL,THITTAMMEL, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR FOR R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) NO.8517 OF 2009 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 9.1.2008 VALID FOR 12 MONTHS THEREFROM. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE REGARDING THIS ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MULAKKUZHA DATED 22.10.2008 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECEIPT DATED 18.9.2008 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR RECEIPT OF MONEY FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, ALAPPUZHA FOR RS.200/= DATED 9.12.2008. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE WORK ORDER ISSUED BY THE PROJECT MANAGER, TEAP DIVISION, KAYAMKULAM, DATED 30.6.2008. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 11.3.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8517 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 27th March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The petitioner has obtained Ext.P1 quarrying permit from the Geologist and that is still in force. He alleges that his quarrying work is obstructed by the party respondents. Despite complaints made, the police is not interfering, and hence, this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as also the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent. 3. So long as the petitioner has got a valid licence in force, he is entitled to carry on the work, in accordance with the terms contained in the licence granted and there cannot be any obstruction caused to the said work. If any such obstruction is caused, necessarily, the police have to interfere, on a complaint being made, to remove such obstruction. W.P.(C) No.8517 of 2009 2 4. However, the 4th respondent would submit that materials are transported in tipper lorry, that too, in high speed, causing dust pollution, since some part of the road is muddy. Necessarily, while the petitioner has got a right to conduct his business, in accordance with the licence condition, he should also ensure that minimum hardship is caused to the neighbours and the public. Therefore, he has to restrict the speed of the tipper lorry to 35 Km. per hour and he shall sprinkle water on the mud road. If the above condition is complied with, the 4th respondent will not cause any obstruction. If it is not complied with, the police will interfere with the matter and provide necessary protection. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. nj.