IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6067 of 2010(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SANJAY SMARAKA ARTS & SPORTS CLUB VADAKKEPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY T.MADHU, P.O.PADNA, KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. E.M.S.MEMORIAL CO-OP.SOCIETY LTD P.O.PADNA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, 2. SHAREEF HAJI P,S/O.FEEFATHIMA P.O.PADNA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD. ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH FOR R2 GOVT.PLEADER SHRI P.N.SANTHOSH FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.6067 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF MARCH, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a charitable society, which is aggrieved by the mining of sand undertaken by the 2nd respondent. This Court called for a report from the District Collector, Kasaragod, as per the interim order dated 25.2.2010. The Tahsildar, Kasaragod inspected the site and going by the report furnished dated 6.3.2010, it is mentioned that permission was accorded for mining of sand for the purpose of making the land suitable for construction of E.M.S.Memorial Hospital. The quarrying permit was issued for quarrying sand in R.S.No.153/3 pt and 152/1 pt of Padne Village and not in 153/2 as represented by the petitioner. The inspection report shows that the land possessed by the petitioner is in R.S.No.153/3 pt and not in 153/2 as stated in the petition. The land of the petitioner is not adjacent to the land where sand is being removed. At the time of inspection, it is noted that the respondent has removed sand upto a depth of 1.8 m to 2.20 m and beyond the permitted area in some places. The condition of 2m depth was put so that no quarry formed at the place and the mining would result in levelling of ground only. In such a situation difference of 20 cms is immaterial as the height of the place is also not uniformly 2 mt. W.P.(C)No.6067/10 -2- at all places. It is also reported that the President of the first respondent has been instructed to follow the NOC conditions scrupulously and Geologist has been instructed to ensure compliance also. 2. Further, it is pointed out that in the report that the contention of the petitioner that mining has been done upto 8m and is contiguous to the property is not correct. 3. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader submitted that the period of the permit is over and the work undertaken is also now over. In that view of the matter, no further orders are called for in the Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that if they seek for sanction for removal of sand from other areas of the same plot, this judgment may not stand in the way of the official respondents considering the same. It is clarified that this judgment will not stand in the way of considering any such application. No costs. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE dsn