IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2011 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13383 of 2011(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ MOHANAN, S/O.MADHAVAN, AGED 62 YEARS, ANJUPARAYIL HOUSE, KULASEKHARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM,PIN 686 001. 2. SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, MINING AND GEOLOGY, KOTTAYAM,PIN 686 001. 3. TAHSILDAR, VAIKOM,PIN 686 141. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KULASEKHARAMANGALAM, VAIKOM, PIN 686 608. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER : SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.13383 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of May 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is stated as the owner of 30.99 cents of land as covered by Ext.P1 Possession Certificate and Ext.P2 location sketch has made Ext.P3 application to the 1st respondent for issuance of no-objection certificate to mine ordinary sand. Pursuant to the report made by the concerned authority as borne by Ext.P4 and also such other proceedings including Ext.P7, the 1st respondent issued no-objection certificate, which was followed by the necessary permission given by the 2nd respondent as per Ext.P9. It is stated that the petitioner satisfied the royalty for mining, by effecting the necessary deposit. The grievance of the petitioner is that, when he was about to start the mining operations, Ext.P11 order has been issued by the 1st respondent cancelling the no-objection certificate already issued, that too without issuing any notice to the petitioner, denying the opportunity of hearing, which made him to approach this Court by filing this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned Govt. Pleader as well. 3. Going by the materials on record, this Court does not require any second thought to arrive at a conclusion that no opportunity was given to the petitioner by the 1st respondent W.P.(C) No.13383/2011 2 before cancelling the no-objection certificate already issued to the petitioner. No such reference is made in Ext.P11, nor has it been discussed anywhere in the body of the same. 4. In the above circumstances, Ext.P11 is set aside, however, without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the 1st respondent to pursue the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. Writ Petition is allowed. No cost. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE