IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28267 of 2010(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- ARAVINDAKSHAN NAIR, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.GOVINDA PILLAI, MAVELIVILA VEEDU, ANAYADI P.O. NOW RESIDING AT PARAMELTHARAYIL, THAMARAKKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICER, KOLLAM-691001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 28267 OF 2010 (G) ===================== Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P10 order passed by the 2nd respondent. On the basis of a permit enabling the petitioner to extract 250 M.T. of laterite stone from 8 ares out of his 11.70 ares of property situated in Re.Sy.No.335/1 in Block NO.1 of Sooranadu North Village, petitioner is found to have extracted a total quantity of 4131 M.T. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for remittance of royalty and penalty. These proceedings resulted in Ext.P9 order passed by the 1st respondent where the matter was remitted to the 2nd respondent to measure and calculate the exact quantity of excess extraction and to issue fresh demand notice. Accordingly, 2nd respondent visited the place, measured and calculated the quantity of excess extraction. Accordingly, royalty and penalty has been quantified and Ext.P10 notice has been issued to the petitioner calling upon him to remit an amount of Rs.71,096/-. By this proceedings, petitioner is directed to remit the aforesaid amount within 15 days and is informed that his failure will result WPC No. 28267/10 :2 : in revenue recovery proceedings. It is challenging Ext.P10, the writ petition is filed. 2. A combined reading of Exts.P9 and P10 therefore show that all that the 2nd respondent was required to do was to measure the excess quantity extracted by the petitioner and to demand the royalty and penalty. This precisely is what has been done by the 2nd respondent in Ext.P10. Ext.P10 therefore is unassailable and the petitioner cannot challenge the same. 3. Be that as it may, counsel seeks an instalment facility to pay the amount demanded by Ext.P10. Having regard to the financial stringency pointed out and also taking into account the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, it is directed that the entire amount due as per Ext.P10 will be permitted to be paid by the petitioner in five equal monthly instalments, the first instalment shall be paid on or before 30/9/2010 and the subsequent instalments will be paid on or before 30th of every succeeding month. In the event any default is committed in paying any of the instalments, it is clarified that it will be open to the respondents to initiate such action as is permissible in law. WPC No. 28267/10 :3 : 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp