IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25480 of 2009(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SHINTO SIMON, THUNDIYIL, CHELLARCOVIL PO - 685 509, IDUKKI, KUMALI. BY ADV. MR.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF MINING & GEOLOGY, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTAM PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, THODUPUZHA IDUKKI. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI DIST. 5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, UDUMPANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVOCATE GENERAL MR.C.P.SUDHAKARA PRASAD BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.T.B. HOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2009 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 25514 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.25480, 25514, 25540, 25546, 25548, 25551, 25553, 25554, 25578, 25608, 25609, 25618, 25628 & 25670/2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated 16th September, 2009 Judgment Heard Sri.Saiby Jose Kidangoor, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.C.P.Sudhakara Prasad, the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents. 2. Common question arises in these writ petitions. They were therefore heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioners in these writ petitions had applied for and were granted, quarrying permits under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967. The quarrying permits were issued by the Geologist concerned on various dates in the month of July, 2009. Before the permits were issued, the Government of Kerala had amended the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 by incorporating a stipulation to the effect that every application for grant or renewal of quarrying permit in respect of minor minerals mentioned in item (2) of Schedule I appended to the Rules for any types of mines should be accompanied by a no-objection certificate W.P.(C) No.25480/2009 & connection 2 from the District Collector concerned. The amendment came into force on 12.3.2009, when the notification was issued and published in the Offiicial Gazette dated 18.3.2009. It is not in dispute that it was without the production of the no-objection certificate from the District Collector that the petitioners in these writ petitions were granted quarrying permits. Shortly after the permits were issued, by separate orders passed on 28.8.2009, the Geologist of Idukki district cancelled the quarrying permits issued to the petitioners. The said orders are under challenge in these writ petitions. 3. The petitioners contend that under the Rules, a quarrying permit can be cancelled only with notice to the holder of the permit and that as the said procedure was not followed in the cases on hand, the orders impugned in these writ petitions are liable to be set aside and the petitioners permitted to continue to operate their quarrying permits. The learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents submits on instructions that before the quarrying permits were issued to the petitioners in these writ petitions, the petitioners did not move the District Collector for grant of no- objection certificate and that was primarily the reason why the District Collector directed the Geologist to cancel the permits. The learned Advocate General also brought to my notice the directions W.P.(C) No.25480/2009 & connection 3 issued by a learned single Judge of this Court in the judgment delivered on 25.6.2009 in W.P.(C) No.8452 of 2009. The learned Advocate General submitted that this Court had by the said judgment directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to ensure that sand is not extracted from paddy fields. 4. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. It is not in dispute that the petitioners had not obtained the requisite no-objection certificate from the District Collector as required under sub-rule (5) of rule 5 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 before they applied for the grant of quarrying permits. The amendment to the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967, insisting on the production of a no-objection certificate from the District Collector concerned, came into force on 12.3.2009. The quarrying permits in these writ petitions were issued on various dates in July, 2009. Therefore, the quarrying permits were not issued to the petitioners after following the prescribed procedure. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that mere failure of the Geologist to issue notice to the petitioners would not vitiate the orders passed by him cancelling the quarrying permits. The Apex Court has in M.C.Mehta v. Union of India and others (JT 1999 (5) SC 114) held that failure to W.P.(C) No.25480/2009 & connection 4 issue notice will not vitiate an order if no conclusion other than the one arrived at in the impugned order is possible on the facts of the case. In the instant case, the petitioners did not admittedly obtain no-objection certificates from the District Collector concerned and therefore the grant of quarrying permits to them was not in order. For that reason alone, the quarrying permits issued to the petitioners were liable to be cancelled or revoked. The failure to issue notice to the petitioners before cancelling their quarrying permit cannot therefore be put forward as a ground to seek invalidation of the impugned orders. I therefore find no ground to interfere with the orders impugned in these writ petitions. The writ petitions fail and are accordingly dismissed. However, I make it clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioners from moving the District Collector for the grant of no-objection certificate as stipulated in sub-rule (5) of rule 5 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 and that in the event of the petitioners moving the District Collector for the grant of no- objection certificates, the District Collector shall consider such requests and take a decision thereon in accordance with law. I also clarify that in the event of the District Collector granting a no objection certificate, it will be open to those petitioners who are W.P.(C) No.25480/2009 & connection 5 issued a no objection certificate to move the Geologist for the grant of a fresh quarrying permit. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge vaa