IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2011 / 21ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21766 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ABDULLA P., S/O.MOIDEEN HAJI, AGED 54 YEARS, MOOZHIKUNNUMMAL HOUSE, VAVAD, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KODUVALLY VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 21766 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 11th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Exts.P1 and P2 are mining permits which were issued to the petitioner enabling him to mine ordinary sand during the period mentioned therein. Even according to the petitioner, the validity of the permits expired on 30/6/2010. During the currency of the permits, Ext.P3 stop memo was issued by the Village Officer on 31/5/2010. Challenging Ext.P3, this writ petition was filed by the petitioner on 12/7/2010, which is long after the mining permits had expired, and on 13/7/2010, the case came up for admission, when it was adjourned to 19/7/2010. On that day, at the request of the counsel for the petitioner, the case was again adjourned. Now the case is brought up by filing IA 205/11 producing Ext.P4 representation stated to have been made by the petitioner to the District Collector on 28/10/10 objecting to Ext.P3 and the counsel seeks a direction to the District Collector to consider the representation. 2. In my view, having regard to the fact that the validity of the permits have already expired on 30/6/010, there is no WPC No. 21766/10 :2 : question of this Court now directing consideration of Ext.P4 representation made by the petitioner on 28/10/2010 where the petitioner seeks revocation of Ext.P3. Therefore, I am not persuaded to direct consideration of Ext.P4. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp