Mathachan, vs Geologist,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 31, 2024

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1324120

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1324120
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice C. Jayachandran
Decided On: May 31, 2024
Case Number: WP(C)/16106/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mathachan,

Respondent

Geologist,

Excerpt

.....ext.p4, in the meantime. - 3 -3. learned government pleader would submit thatalthough an opportunity was afforded vide ext.p5, the petitioner did not appear and thus failed to avail the same. learned government pleader would, however, submit that no orders have been passed pursuant to the hearing afforded vide ext.p5.4. in answer to the same, the petitioner would submit that he had appeared for the hearing and that a written statement was made on that day pursuant to ext.p5.5. in the above facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the respondent geologist to pass anorder in the representation preferred by thepetitioner as against ext.p4 - in which an opportunity of hearing was granted vide ext.p5 - within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. petitioner will produce acopy of this judgment before the respondent geologist. until such time, no coercive steps shall - 4 - be taken for recovery of the amounts covered by ext.p4. the writ petition is disposed of as above. sd/- c.jayachandran, judge ww - 5 - appendix of wp(c) 16106/2024 petitioner's exhibits: exhibit p1 a true copy of the injuction order dated 15-01-2020 in ia.no.2720/2019 in os.no. 481 of 2019 of the munsiff court, aluva. exhibit p2 a true copy of the notice dated 09-06- exhibit p3 a true copy of the reply dated 17-07-2020 before the respondent.exhibit p4 a true copy of the notice dated 22-07- exhibit p5 a true copy of the notice dated 16-09- exhibit p6 a true copy of the revenue recoverynotice issued by deputy tahasildar, aluva dated 22-01-2024. exhibit p7 a true copy of representation dated 11.4.2024 submitted by the petitioner before the respondent.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024/10TH JYAISHTA, 1946 WP(C) NO.16106 OF 2024 PETITIONER: MATHACHAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.VARKYCHAN, EDASSERY HOUSE, RAYINMELKARA, CHENGAMANADU, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683578. BY ADVS. G.P.SHINOD GOVIND PADMANAABHAN AJIT G ANJARLEKAR ATUL MATHEWS GAYATHRI S.B. RESPONDENT: GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030. BY ADV. AJITH VISWANATHAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 2 -

JUDGMENT

Dated, this the 31st May, 2024 The petitioner has been issued with Ext.P4 demand notice alleging illegal removal of clay, which seek to recover the royalty, as also, the penalty.

2. Petitioner preferred a representation as against Ext.P4 demand. Going by Ext.P5, it is clear that an opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that, without passing an order in the representation

preferred       by    the   petitioner,       albeit       affording     an
opportunity          of   hearing,     the    authorities         are   now
trying     to   recover      the     amounts       covered    by    Ext.P4

demand by resorting to Revenue Recovery proceedings. In short, the petitioner seeks an order to be passed to his representation; and not to initiate any coercive proceedings for recovery of the amounts covered by Ext.P4, in the meantime. - 3 -

3. Learned Government Pleader would submit that

although an opportunity was afforded vide Ext.P5, the petitioner did not appear and thus failed to avail the same. Learned Government Pleader would, however, submit that no orders have been passed pursuant to the hearing afforded vide Ext.P5.

4. In answer to the same, the petitioner would submit that he had appeared for the hearing and that a written statement was made on that day pursuant to Ext.P5.

5. In the above facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the respondent Geologist to pass an

order in the representation preferred by the

petitioner as against Ext.P4 - in which an opportunity of hearing was granted vide Ext.P5 - within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner will produce a

copy of this judgment before the respondent Geologist. Until such time, no coercive steps shall - 4 - be taken for recovery of the amounts covered by Ext.P4. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- C.JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE ww - 5 - APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16106/2024 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE INJUCTION ORDER DATED 15-01-2020 IN IA.NO.2720/2019 IN OS.NO. 481 OF 2019 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ALUVA. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 09-06- EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17-07-2020 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4          A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22-07-
EXHIBIT P5          A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16-09-
EXHIBIT P6          A TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY

NOTICE ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, ALUVA DATED 22-01-2024. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 11.4.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Mathachan, vs Geologist, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C. Jayachandran