IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 10501 of 2006(S) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SAMUEL C.THOMAS, S/O. LATE SAMUEL, AGED 56, CHAMBADAPUNNAYIL, KOLABHAGOM P.O., THODIYOOR, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. MR.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVALLA. 4. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, TRIVANDRUM. 5. THOTTAPUZHASSERY PANCHAYATH, THOTTAPUZHASSERY, MARAMON, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 6. THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 7. M/S. PANACHAYIL INDUSTRIES, REP.BY ITS PARTNER BINU K.MATHEW,PALLIYAMBIL HOUSE, WEST OTHERA, KUTTOOR, THIRUVALLA. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.MEERA R5 BY ADV.MR.P.HARIDAS R6 BY ADV.MR.SUNNY MATHEW, SC, POLLUTION C.BOARD R6 BY ADV.MR.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS,SC,POLL.C.BOARD R7 BY ADV.MR.N.JAMES KOSHY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.10501/2006 S APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH OF CHETTUTHADAM AND CHARALKUNNU. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE BETWEEN FIRST RESPONDENT AND THE 7TH RESPONDENT EXECUTED ON 28/12/1998. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 30/12/05 GIVEN TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PETITION GIVEN TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA DTD. 30/01/06. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER THOTTAPUZHASSERY DTD. 3/2/06. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DTD. 31/12/05 OF PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PANACHAYATH. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 27/12/05 ISSUED BY AGRICULTURAL OFFICER. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 19/12/05 ISSUED BY MAR THOMA SUNDAY SCHOOL SAMAJAM. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE ARTICLE SILICOSIS THAT APPEARED IN JANAPATHAM MAGAZINE OCTOBER 2005. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE ARTICLE AVOID CATASTROPHE IN MAGAZINE KERALA CALLING ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE CAVEAT PETITION TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 15/03/06 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P13(A): COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.139/04 OF ARANMULA SRO. EXT.P13(B): COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.120/06 OF ARANMULA SRO. EXT.P13(C): COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.235/06 OF ARANMULA SRO. EXT.P14: COPY OF LETTER DTD. 12/04/06 BY DIST. GEOLOGIST TO 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P15: COPY OF ORDER DTD. 24/05/06 BY VILLAGE OFFICER, THOTTAPUZHASSERY. Kss ..2/- ....2..... WPC.NO.10501/2006 S EXT.P16: COPY OF LETTER DTD. 5/05/06 BY DIST. MEDICAL OFFICER TO 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P17: COPY OF COMPLAINT BY PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 15/04/2006. EXT.P18: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS (4 NOS). RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R6(A): COPY OF THE LIST OF SURVEY NUMBERS DTD. 15/01/2008. EXT.R6(B): COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE DTD. 10/03/2008. EXT.R7(A): COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENSE DTD. 22/04/2004. EXT.R7(B): COPY OF THE EXTENSION ORDER DTD. 29/03/2006. EXT.R7(C): COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 03/10/1996. EXT.R7(D): COPY OF THE PERMISSION ORDER DTD. 16/02/2006. EXT.R7(E): COPY OF THE CONSENT ISSUED BY KSPCB DTD. 13/12/2005. EXT.R7(F): COPY OF THE LICENSE DTD. 19/03/2002. EXT.R7(G): COPY OF THE PLAINT OS.NO.628/2004. EXT.R7(H): COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.3176/2006 IN O.S.NO.628/2006 DTD. 29/06/2005. EXT.R7(I): COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE QUARRY ISSUED ON 10/03/2008 BY THE KERALA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXT.R7(J): COPY OF THE SANCTION ORDER DTD. 11/02/2008 ISSUED BY THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVALLA. EXT.R7(K): COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE TAHSILDAR THIRUVALLA BEFORE THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss J.B.KOSHY, Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J. -------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.10501 of 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated 25th February, 2009 JUDGMENT Koshy, Ag.C.J . This writ petition is filed against the removal of soil including laterate soil from Chettuthadam hill under the cover of permission to blast rocks from a small portion. We have directed the Pollution Control Board to file a report. The Chief Environmental Engineer of the Pollution Control Board reported that the area under consideration in this case is a micro water shed area with thin layer of top soil and the present activity may reduce the water holding capacity of the area. It is also reported that there are no buildings or structures nearby and the petitioner's house is located more than 100 metres away from the mining area. Certain precautionary measures were mentioned by the Chief Environmental Engineer at paragraph 6 of the report as follows: “6. However, if blasting is done indiscriminately, the problems due to dust and vibration will be more and may affect the nearby area. Hence, the 7th respondent may be directed to adopt following preventive/precautionary measures for their mining activity. 1. Restrict the depth of boreholes to a maximum of 1.5m to reduce impact due to blasting. 2. Restrict number of simultaneous explosions/blasting with electric detonators to a maximum of 10 numbers at a time to reduce the problem due to vibration. W.P.(C)No.10501/2006 2 3. No top soil removal may be done within 5 m from the petitioner's boundary. 4. In addition to the above, the 7th respondent may be directed to continue to provide drinking water to nearby affected residents during summer season.” The above directions should be implemented strictly. Learned counsel for the contesting respondent undertakes to comply with the above directions. The Chief Environmental Engineer and officers of the Pollution Control Board should occasionally inspect the premises and if any of the conditions are violated, they should stop further quarrying activities by issuing stop memo. If the conditions are not complied with, the petitioner is also free to file a complaint before the Pollution Control Board so that appropriate remedial action can be taken. Other conditions in the licence/permits granted by the authorities also should be complied with by the contesting respondent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE V.GIRI JUDGE tks