IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34980 of 2009(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- KUNCHANDI VAIDIAN, AGED 53, SON OF MATHEW VAIDIAN, MAPPILA VEEDU PUTHENPURAYIL, KIZHAKKEKARA MURI, MAINAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.T.K.VENUGOPALAN MR.SHIBU JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R), TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUR, KOLLAM. 2. GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BIJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 34980 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Challenging Ext.P6 order issued under provisions of the Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, the petitioner had approached this court on an earlier occasion. Through Ext.P9 judgment the petitioner was relegated to the appellate authority to invoke the remedy provided under Rule 43 of the said Rule. This court directed the petitioner to file appeal against Ext.P6 within a period of two weeks from the date of judgment and the appellate authority was directed to consider the appeal and stay petition if any filed along with such appeal, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such appeal. In order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the appellate authority further recovery steps were stayed for a period of one month. 2. It is stated that pursuant to Ext.P9 judgment the petitioner had filed Ext.P10 appeal as well as Ext.P11 W.P.(C)No. 34980 of 2009 -2- petition seeking interim stay. But the appellate authority has not considered those petition and issued any order either on the appeal or on the stay application. Apprehending coercive steps of recovery the petitioner is again approaching this court in the present writ petition. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on the basis of instructions submitted that, the appeal was already been registered before the 3rd respondent and it is posted for hearing on 29.12.2009. It is further stated that the 3rd respondent has already issued an order of interim stay against recovery steps, till the disposal of the appeal. 4. The above submission is recorded. Since the appellate authority is in sezein of the matter and since an interim stay has already been granted, no further direction is required in this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly closed. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/