IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 31241 of 2008(T) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ V.V.DEVASSIKUTTY, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.VAREED, VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, SOUTH VELLARAPPILLY P.O., CHOWWARA THEKKUMBHAGOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.A.JALEEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, THRISSUR. 2. ANNAMANADA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ANNAMANADA P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (SPECIAL GRADE) 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (P) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. R1, R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. M.A.ASIF R2 BY ADV. MR.FRANCO T.J. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.31241/2008 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF LICENCE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 6/10/2006. EXT.P2: COPY OF LICENCE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 10/05/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF DEALER'S LICENCE DTD. 21/07/2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE DEALER'S LICENCE DTD. 28/04/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF CONSENT LETTER DTD. 28/08/2006 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXT.P6: COPY OF APPLICATION DTD. 21/02/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF NOTICE DTD. 22/03/2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 27/09/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF ORDER DTD. 29/03/2008 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No.31241 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner's grievance is regarding Exhibit P9. Petitioner submits that he is doing brick manufacturing business and his establishment is situated within the jurisdiction of second respondent, Panchayath. According to the petitioner, his establishment is functioning on the basis of all necessary licences and permits, which were issued by the statutory authorities. Petitioner complains that despite all this, on the strength of Exhibit P9 issued by the Government, second respondent is declining to renew the permit. It is with that grievance, this writ petition has been filed. 2. Regarding Exhibit P9, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that activity that is prohibited by this order is only excavation of clay for manufacturing bricks. It is stated that for his manufacturing purposes, the petitioner is purchasing clay from outside and is bringing same to his manufacturing site. It is stated that so long as there is no excavation of clay, such an activity is a permissible one, even on the terms of Exhibit P9. 3. I heard counsel appearing for the Panchayath and also the W.P.(C) No.31241/2008 2 learned Government pleader. 4. Reading of Exhibit P9 gives the impression that the prohibition imposed by this order is only excavation of clay. If as stated by the petitioner, he is purchasing and bringing clay from outside and utilising the same for manufacturing bricks, such an activity does not come within the purview of Exhibit P9. 5. Therefore, it will be open to the Geologist to consider the application made by the petitioner for renewal of his permit provided the activity of the petitioner is as stated above. Counsel for the Panchayath, referring to Exhibit P3 permit issued by the first respondent and Exhibit P5 consent issued by the Pollution Control Board, contends that these orders have expired. It is clarified that even if the 1st respondent issues a permit, it will be the obligation of the petitioner to comply with all other statutory requirements, if he is to engage in the brick manufacturing activities. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the first respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm