IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2011 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 29598 of 2011(Y) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- PRADESHIKA PUNARADIVASA SAMITHI, NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, ANTONY. BY ADV. SRI.K.SANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM-690 588. 3. KERALA MINERALS & METALS LIMITED, CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR-691 582. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.M.J. RAJASHREE R3 BY ADVS. M/S.B.S.KRISHNAN ASSOCIATES, SC. KMML SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 29598/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE MINUTES DATED 09/02/2006. P2: COPY COF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05/05/2011. P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06/06/2011. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER RECEIVED FROM CHIEF MINISTER'S OFFICE DATED 04/08/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 29598 of 2011 Y ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petitioner is an organisation representing the persons whose lands were purchased by the third respondent company, for the purpose of mining of rare earth. In this writ petition, essentially what is sought for is the implementation of clauses 1 and 7 of Ext.P1, the minutes of meeting held on 09.02.2006 between the management and trade unions. In so far as clause 1 is concerned, that provides for the rehabilitation of the persons who were displaced on account of purchasing their lands for the mining. In so far as they are concerned, the company had agreed that they will be rehabilitated in the lands acquired by the company after mining is completed. Thus, there can be a claim under clause 1 only after the mining activities are over. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the W.P.(C) No.29598/2011 : 2 : company submits that, though the properties have been purchased by the company for the purpose of mining, company has to acquire a mineral recovery plant and that plant has not been acquired so far and, therefore, mining also has not been started. There is no material in this writ petition indicating that the stand taken by the company is incorrect. If that be so, at this stage, the claim is premature. 3. In so far as clause 7 of Ext.P1 minutes is concerned, that provides for preference in the matter of employment to persons who are displaced on account of land acquisition. In so far as this clause is concerned, the company submits that even now, displaced persons are being given preference. 4. In the light of the above, there cannot be any direction to implement clauses 1 and 7 of Ext.P1 as sought for by the petitioner. Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/01/12