IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 13TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3288 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. N.K. SHAJI, NIRAPPEL HOUSE, MALAYATTOOR. P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. PAUL WILSON, THALIATH HOUSE, NEELESWARAM P.O., VIA KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.T.R.RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, ALUVA. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MALAYATTOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. DIRECTOR, MINING AND GEOLOGY,TRIVANDRUM. 6. GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.3288 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are assignees of certain lands covered by Exhibits P1 and P1(a) Pattas and Exhibits P2 and P2(a) assignment orders. The assignment was for the purpose of cultivation of rubber. It is stated that some portion of the land could not be cultivated with rubber since the same consists of granite and without removal of the granite, rubber cultivation was not possible. Hence the petitioners approached under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules for grant of permit in respect of the portion of the property under Exhibits P1 and P2 and the matter was reported to the Geologist by the Revenue Department recommending it. Accordingly, permits were granted to the petitioners also. 2. Presently, the petitioners are aggrieved by Exhibit P9 communication issued by the District Collector to the Director of Mining and Geology seeking for cancellation of the permit on the W.P.(C) No.3288/2010 2 ground that as the property is meant for agricultural operations alone there is violation of the conditions of the assignment orders. 3. There were some proceedings earlier. Exhibits P3 and P5 are the stop memos issued to the petitioners and Exhibits P4 and P6 are the show cause notices issued to them. Against the same, the 1st petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.23324/2009 wherein this Court rendered Exhibit P7 judgment. By Exhibit P7, this Court directed Exhibit P8 therein to be treated as a show cause notice and to file objections in the matter and accordingly, the petitioner filed objections as per Exhibit P8(a) before the Tahsildar. The matter is pending before the District Collector as referred to by the Tahsildar. It is pointed out that in the meanwhile, the petitioners happened to get a copy of Exhibit P9 communication whereby the District Collector has requested the Director of Mining and Geology to cancel the permit granted. 4. Learned Government Pleader submitted that Exhibit P9 is not an order at all and it is only a communication sent by the W.P.(C) No.3288/2010 3 District Collector to the Director of Mining and Geology and hence the writ petition is premature. If at all the Director of Mining and Geology or the Geologist takes any action to cancel the permit, then the petitioners will be afforded an opportunity of hearing to submit their objections. In the event of the District Collector initiating any steps to cancel the Patta, then also the petitioners will be afforded an opportunity of hearing before passing any final orders. This writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp