IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2009 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11267 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ ABDUL SHUKOOR, S/O.KOCHASANKUNJU, MACHU HOUSE, MAILAKADU KARA, ADICHANELLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE GEOLOGIST, KOLLAM, MINING & GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 11267 OF 2009 (C) ===================== Dated this the 6th day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that by Ext.P2, he sought a mining permit from the 1st respondent. It is stated that thereupon the 1st respondent asked for an NOC from the 2nd respondent, which made the petitioner submit Ext.P3 to the 2nd respondent for NOC. Orders have not been passed on Ext.P3 and therefore complaining of delay, the writ petition has been filed. 2. Taking note of the above grievance raised by the petitioner, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3. Although the petitioner has a case that by Ext.P4, his neighbouring property owner has been given Ext.P5 permit, that certainly is a matter for respondents 1 and 2 to consider and therefore I need not pronounce of its relevance in this writ petition. 3. It is directed that the 2nd respondent shall consider Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp