IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3384 of 2009(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SURESH.T.V, S/O. THALASSERY VEETTIL VELAYUDHAN, KANIYARKODE VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK ,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE THRISSUR. 2. M.RAJAKUMARAN, PRESIDENT PARAKADAVU PADASEKHARA KARSHAKA SAMITHI, KANAYARKODE VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER KANIYARKODE VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No.3384 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be a brick manufacturer, using the clay brought from outside. According to the petitioner, Ext.P4 order has been issued by the first respondent exercising his powers under Section 133 of the Cr.P.C, prohibiting excavation of clay. It is stated that, on the strength of Ext.P4, although the petitioner is not excavating any clay as mentioned in the said order, the brick manufacturing activities are ordered to be stopped. 2. It is stated that since his activities are not covered by Ext.P4, irrespective of the said order, he is entitled to carry on his brick manufacturing activities utilizing the clay brought from outside. On this basis it is contended that the action of respondents 1 and 2 in ordering closure of his establishment is illegal. 3. However, from Ext.P4 order it is seen that it is only a preliminary order and it is open to the petitioner to WP(c).No.3384/09 2 appear before the first respondent and satisfy him that he is not engaged in excavation of clay and therefore he is outside the purview of Ext.P4. 4. If the petitioner is able to satisfy the first respondent as above, I have no reason to think that the first respondent will not issue orders permitting the petitioners to resume his activities. Therefore, I direct the petitioner to approach the first respondent producing the documents substantiating his contention that he is not engaged in excavation of clay and manufacturing the bricks utilizing the clay brought from outside. If the petitioner produces such materials, the first respondent shall immediately examine his claim and take a decision in this matter adverting to the materials produced by him. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the first respondent for compliance. vi (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE WP(c).No.3384/09 3