M.Abbas vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 16, 2022

~5 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1442013

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/1442013
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Decided On: Jun 16, 2022
Case Number: WP(C)/961/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M.Abbas

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the respondent to renew ext.p1 noc in favour of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 2 weeks. iii. issue such other appropriate writ order or direction that may be deemed to be just and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case. (sic)2. petitioner’s request for renewal of no objection certificate (noc) to undertake quarrying in government land was turned down primarily on account of the fact that ext.p8guidelines for grant of noc over the government lands hadcome into force. in ext.p8 guidelines it is specifically noted that only lands which have road access to the top of the identified area shall be made available for grant of noc. according to the petitioner, there is a way to his property. this point is not considered by the district collector while passing ext.p12 order. hence this writ petition.3. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned government pleader.4. after hearing both sides, i think the petitioner canbe directed to approach the 1st respondent with a representation stating that there is a road in existence and the conditions in ext.p8 guidelines are complied with by the petitioner. the government can be directed to consider the same in accordance to law. a time limit also can be fixed to consider the representation by the government. therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:1. the petitioner is free to file a representation narrating his grievance raised in this writ petition before the 1st respondent, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisjudgment.2. once such a representation is received, the 1 strespondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of the representation.3. the petitioner is free to produce additional documents and additional statement, if.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 961 OF 2022 PETITIONER: M.ABBAS AGED 68 YEARS A.R.VILLA, SIDEWALL, MANCODE P.O., CHITHARA, KOLLAM-691559. BY ADVS. ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL S.SREEDEV RONY JOSE LEO LUKOSE SUZANNE KURIAN CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KAANKATHU MUKKU, KOLLAM-691013. BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA ADV.ASHWIN SETHUMADHAVAN, SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.961 of 2022 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2022

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P12 and quash the same. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent to renew Ext.P1 NOC in favour of the Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 2 weeks. iii. Issue such other appropriate writ order or direction that may be deemed to be just and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case. (SIC)

2. Petitioner’s request for renewal of No Objection Certificate (NOC) to undertake quarrying in Government land was turned down primarily on account of the fact that Ext.P8

guidelines for grant of NOC over the Government lands had

come into force. In Ext.P8 guidelines it is specifically noted that only lands which have road access to the top of the identified area shall be made available for grant of NOC. According to the petitioner, there is a way to his property. This point is not considered by the District Collector while passing Ext.P12 order. Hence this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. After hearing both sides, I think the petitioner can

be directed to approach the 1st respondent with a representation stating that there is a road in existence and the conditions in Ext.P8 guidelines are complied with by the petitioner. The Government can be directed to consider the same in accordance to law. A time limit also can be fixed to consider the representation by the Government. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The petitioner is free to file a representation narrating his grievance raised in this writ petition before the 1st respondent, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

2. Once such a representation is received, the 1 st

respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of the representation.

3. The petitioner is free to produce additional documents and additional statement, if necessary.

4. While passing final orders, the 1st respondent will consider the applicability of Ext.P13

judgment also.

sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JV JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 961/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOC DATED 14.8.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED 11.7.2016 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.3.2018 BEARING NO.B-17613/16 ISSUED BY THE SUB COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.10.2018

BEARING G.O.NO.1179/2018/IND ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 3.2.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.8.2021 IN WP(C) NO.16218/2021 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.9.2021 BEARING NO.DCKLM.12636/20/L.12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF GO (MS) 28/2021/RD DATED 28.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CADASTRAL MAP OF THE AREA IN QUESTION. Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2021 IN WP(C) NO.22865/2021 ON THE FILED OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.1.2022 WITH NO.DCKLM.12636/20/L.12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.3.2021 IN WP(C) NO.18777/2020 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 8.12.2021 BEARING NO.C7-180923/2018 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R2(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO ALL DISTRICT COLLECTORS DATED 08.02.2022

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties M.Abbas vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan