IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2009 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30207 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.V.JAYAPRAKASH, PERUMAYIL HOUSE, PEROOR P.O. KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM SRI.BIBIN K.DIVAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE GELOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION ROAD, COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM -2. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 30207 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Sri. Philip T.Varghese, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.Narayanan, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is a dealer in ordinary sand. Ext.P1 is the dealer's licence issued to him by the Geologist of Kottayam district. By Ext.P2 order dated 18.8.2009 which is impugned in this writ petition, the Geologist of Kottayam district suspended the operation of Ext.P1 licence. The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 on the ground that before the said order was passed, he was not put on notice or heard. The petitioner also submit that what is prohibited by the District Collector is only mining of sand and not the sale of sand already mined and collected and therefore on the merits also, the order is liable to be set aside. 3. Sri.P.Narayanan, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the petitioner was not put on notice or heard before Ext.P1 licence was suspended. It is submitted that the District Collector and the officers W.P.(C) No. 30207/09 2 of Mining and Geology Department, Kottayam intended only to stop unauthorized quarrying and mining of sand. In the light of the admitted fact that before Ext.P2 order was passed, suspending the operation of the licence issued to the petitioner, the petitioner was not put on notice or heard, I am of the opinion that Ext.P2 cannot be sustained. The order does not also set out on the ground on which the dealer's licence issued to the petitioner is liable to be cancelled. Further, a reading of Ext.P2 indicates that the District Collector had only directed that quarrying of sand should be stopped. In such circumstances, I allow this writ petition, quash Ext.P2 and hold that the petitioner is entitled to continue to operate Ext.P1 licence in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated therein. I make it clear that nothing contained in this judgment will stand in the way of the respondents from proceeding against the petitioner in accordance with law, if grounds exist for suspending or cancelling the dealer's licence issued to him. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE vps W.P.(C) No. 30207/09 3