IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31376 of 2009(N) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- KUNCHANDI VAIDIAN,AGED53, S/O.MATHEW VAIDIAN,MAPPILA VEEDU,PUTHENPURAYIL, KIZHAKKEKARA MURI, MAINAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUR,KOLLAM. 2. GEOLOGIST,MINING AND GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE,KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL RAHIM, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 31376 OF 2009 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009 JUDGMENT ------------------- The petitioner is challenging Ext.P6 proceedings of the 2nd respondent whereby royalty and fine are imposed on the petitioner under the provisions of Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, on the allegation that the petitioner had unauthorisedly extracted laterate stone from the property mentioned therein. Before issuing Ext.P6, the petitioner was issued with Ext.P4 notice and only after considering objections submitted by the petitioner through Ext.P5, the said order was issued. 2. Under Rule 49 of the Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, the petitioner has got an effective remedy by way of appeal against Ext.P6 order. But the petitioner expressed an apprehension that since Ext.P6 is styled as a notice, appeal may not sustainable against the same. It is evident from the conclusions and findings contained in Ext.P6 that the same is a proceedings by which the petitioner has been imposed with royalty and fine. Therefore Ext.P6 is an order appealable under Rule 43 of the Minor Mineral W.P.(C) NO. 31376 OF 2009 2 Concessions Rules. 3. Under the above circumstances the petitioner is relegated to the remedy by way of appeal. If the petitioner files any appeal before the competent authority within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such appeal, after affording an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner can also move before the appellate authority seeking stay of collection of the amount, pending disposal of such appeal. 4. However, in order to facilitate the petitioner to move before the appellate authority, recovery steps initiated pursuant to Exts.P7 and P8 notices are directed to be kept in abeyance for one month from today. It is further directed that movable property belonging to the petitioner,attached through Exts.P7 and P8, shall be returned to the petitioner without any further delay. C.K. ABDUL RAHIM JUDGE PKK W.P.(C) NO. 31376 OF 2009 3