Binoj P.G. and others v. District Collector, Ernakulam and others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 / 13TH MAGHA, 1944 ## WP(C) NO. 36596 OF 2016 ## PETITIONERS: - 1 BINOJ P.G., AGED 39 YEARS S/O. GOPI, PARASSERIL VEEDU, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, THIRUMARADY VILLAGE, MANNATHUR P O,PIN-686667. - 2 T. A. MUHAMMED BILAL, AGED 54 YEARS S/O. AYYAPPAN, DARUSSALAM VEEDU, PATTIMATTOM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK P.O., PATTIMATTOM PIN-683562. - 3 BABY K. P., AGED 62 YEARS S/O. PAILY, KULAPPARAYIL VEEDU, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, THIRUMARADY VILLAGE, MANNATHUR P O, PIN-686667. - 4 RAMAKRISHNAN K. P., AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KADUVAKKUZHIYIL, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,THIRUMARADY VILLAGE, MANNATHUR P O, PIN-686667. BY ADVS. SMT. AYSHA YOUSEFF SRI.C.M.EBRAHIM SRI.JOBI.A.THAMPI SMT.MOLLY JACOB SMT.PRIYANKA SEBASTIAN ## RESPONDENTS: - 1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-PIN-682030. - 2 GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, PIN-682030. - 3 THIRUMARADY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-686667. - 4 POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:2:- - 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE, PALLIMUKKU, PETTAH P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695024. - 6 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA 686661. - 7 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686661. - 8 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. - 9 NIZAMUDEEN, S/O.SIDHIQ, KARUKUNNATH, PERINGALA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-683565. - 10 BABU JACOB, S/O. JACOB, PULPPARAYIL, MANNATHUR P O, PAMPAKUDA VIA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686667. - 11 T. K. JOSEPH, THEKKEKARA , MANNTHUR, PAMPAKUDA VIA, ERNAKULAM-686667. - 12 O. S. JOSEPH, OOLAKUNNEL , SOUTH PIRAMADOM P O,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. - 13 BINDU P.A., THEVARAMADATHIL, MANNATHOOR, PAPMPAKUDA P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686667. - 14 GEORGE CHUMMAR, S/O. CHUMMAR, EDAPPALAKKATTU HOUSE,PERIMADOM P O, PAMPAKUDA-PIN-686667. - 15 MAMACHAN, KARIPPAKUDY, PUTHENPURAYIL, MANNATHUR PIN-686667. - 16 SAJIMON GEORGE, KUZHOOR PUTHENPURAYIL,MANNATHOOR, PIN-686667. - 17 GEORGE JACOB, S/O.JACOB PANATTIL, MAWNNTHUR, PAMPAKUDA VIA, ERNAKULAM-686667. - 18 BIJU K GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, POTHANATTIL HOUSE, MANNATHUR P O, PIN-686667. - 19 VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUMARADY-PIN-686687. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:3:- - 20 DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, BLOCK C-2, 3RD FLOOR, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM , PIN-682030. - 21 JOINT CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, NO 140, RUKMINI LAXMIPATI ROAD, MARSHALLAS ROAD, EGMORE, CHENNAI-600008. - 22 THE TAHSILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. R5 TO R8 & R22 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V. TEKCHAND R3 BY ADV. SRI. GIJIMON ISSAC R4 ADV. SRI. T. NAVEEN, SC R11 BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE ABRAHAM R12, R14 AND R16 BY ADV. DINESH R. SHENOY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C): 36596/2016 -:4:- ## **JUDGMENT** ## **S. Manikumar, CJ** ## Instant public interest writ petition has been filed by the ## petitioners for the following reliefs: - (i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, commanding respondents 1 to 4, to take immediate measures to stop the illegal quarrying operations done by respondents 9 to 14 in Ward Nos.1 & 2 of Thirumarady Grama Panchayat; - (ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1[st] respondent to take action on Exhibits-P27 to P29 reports of the Village Officer, Thirumarady; - (iii) To direct respondents 1 to 5 to conduct a joint site inspection of the quarries owned by respondents 9 to 14 and 3 crusher units owned by respondents 10, 11 and 13 and submit a report to this Court regarding the extent of area from which granite has been extracted, whether there is any encroachment into Government puramboke land, actual quantity of granite extracted by them, damages caused to the houses and regarding the environmental and ecological impact as well as the health problems prevailing in Ward Nos.1 and 2 of the Thirumarady Grama Panchayat due to the illegal functioning of the quarries and crusher units there, within a time limit prescribed by this Court; - (iv) To issue any other writ, order or direction, directing respondents 2, 3, 4, 21 and 22, not to renew/grant permit/consent or licence to respondents 9 to 14 for functioning the quarries and crusher units concerned owned by them. - (v) To issue any other writ, order or direction, directing the 6[th] respondent – Regional Transport Officer, Muvattupuzha, to take action against the tipper and Taurus lorries and other heavy goods vehicles plying with overload through the narrow reads of Thirumarady Grama Panchayat and to report the action taken on the check report of the WP(C): 36596/2016 -:5:- inspection of vehicles conducted on 24.04.2016 by Joint Regional Transport Officer. - (vi) To issue any other writ, order or direction, directing respondents 1 and 2 to inspect and report as to whether the 11[th] respondent is conducting quarrying within the limits of the area allotted to him as per Exhibit-P10 lease deed and to take actions in accordance with law if there is any violation thereof. - (vii) Grant such other appropriate writ, direction or order as this Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. - (viii) To allow the cost. 2. Brief facts for disposal of the writ petition are that; petitioners, are the residents of Thirumarady Grama Panchayat in Muvattupuzha taluk. They are aggrieved by the illegal conduct of quarrying operations by respondents 9 to 14 in Ward Nos.1 & 2 of Thirumarady Grama Panchayat against the law, in total disregard to the licence/permit conditions. According to the petitioners, the functioning of 7 quarries and 3 crusher units within a radius of 2 kilometres, specifically located in Ward Nos. I and II, where 200 families are residing, have adversely affected the environment and ecology prevailing there and cause pollution leading to nuisance, obstruction and damage to public roads. 3. Petitioners have contended that respondents 9 to 14 are running the metal crusher unit, without providing adequate pollution control measures, which have created more pollution in that area. Flying of rock WP(C): 36596/2016 -:6:- pieces at the time of blasting to the nearby properties is a common phenomena, which has paved way to break titles of the roofs of nearby houses. Apart from the above, the residents are illegally affected by the illegal quarrying operations and the pollution, as well as congestion caused, due to the continuous plying of tippers and Taurus with overload through the narrow village road. 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioners have submitted a complaints to the 3[rd] respondent Panchayat and other authorities, individually, as well as collectively. Exhibits-P27 to P29 are the reports submitted by the Village Officer, Thirumarady, on various complaints made by the people of the locality. Since it could not evoke any positive response, petitioners have formed a Paura Samithy in which, the 1[st] petitioner is the Chairman and respondents 3 and 4 are its Convener and members. Said Samithy has taken up the cause with the authorities concerned. However, no action has been taken. Petitioners have also contended that respondents 9 to 18 are conducting their illegal activities without obtaining environmental clearance from the Environment Impact Assessment Authority. 5. Due to the inaction on the part of the respondents concerned, to protect the rights of the people of the locality enshrined under Article 21 WP(C): 36596/2016 -:7:- of the Constitution of India, petitioners have filed this writ petition for the reliefs stated supra. 6. Refuting the averments made in the writ petition and the reliefs sought for, 9[th] respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 6.2.2017, wherein it was contended that as averred by the petitioners, there is no registered Samithy in the name “Paura Samithy Mannathur”, existed in that area. The 9[th] respondent is running the quarry with all the requisite permits and licenses from the concerned authorities. 7. Referring to Exhibit-R9(a) dated 15.06.2016, 9[th] respondent has further stated that Exhibit-P1 permit issued by the 2[nd] respondent – Geologist, obtained under the RTI Act, 2005 though expired on 9.6.2016, has been renewed upto 14.06.2017. 8. Referring to Exhibit-R9(b) licence issued by the 21[st] respondent viz., Joint Controller of Explosives, Chennai, dated 15.03.2016, 9[th] respondent has further stated that Exhibit-P2 explosive licence dated 05.11.2013 issued by the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives, Chennai, was renewed upto 31.03.2021. Thereafter, the 9[th] respondent has obtained extension of consent issued by the 4[th] respondent – Pollution Control Board, represented by its Member Secretary, Pattom P.O., Thiruvananthapuram on 14.03.2016, as evident from Exhibit-R9(c). WP(C): 36596/2016 -:8:- 9. Referring to Exhibit-R9(d) Mining Mate's Certificate of Competency issued by the Zonal Secretary, Board of Mining Examination, South Zone, Bengaluru, respondent No.9 has stated that for operation of granite quarry, he has appointed a Mining Mate and that he is also having a Shot Firer's Certificate issued by the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, Ernakulam, as evidenced by Exhibit-R9(e). 10. Referring to Exhibit-R9(f) proceedings of the 5[th] respondent No.538/SEIAA/EC3/3881/2014 dated 01-06-2016, respondent No.9 has further contended that he is having environmental clearance for running the quarry. That apart, replying on Exhibit-R9(g) licence issued by the 3[rd] respondent, 9[th] respondent has submitted that he is having D & O licence to operate the quarry, and it was renewed upto 31.03.2017. Hence, according to the 9[th] respondent, he is running the quarry with all the requisite licenses and permits from the concerned authorities and the allegations to the contra, are false and it is mooted by the 2[nd] petitioner for his personal gains. 11. Respondent No.9 has further contended that the permitted limit of quantity for extraction of mineral is 30,000 metric tons and that the royalty paid to the Government is Rs.7,20,000/-. According to the 9[th] respondent, nearly 2500 metric tons is extracted per month from 0.9330 WP(C): 36596/2016 -:9:- hectares of land comprising in Survey Nos.567/2B2, 567/2A, 569/1-3 of Thirumarady village and that the tipper lorries and other light heavy vehicles are coming to the quarry for taking granite pieces to various places as per the requirements of various customers. Hence, the averment that the respondents extracted quantity more than the permitted limit is incorrect. Finally, it is contended by the 9[th] respondent that the petitioners are residing out of the prescribed limit mentioned in the Minor Mineral Concession Rules. 12. Apart from the above, 2[nd] respondent – Geologist, Department of Mining and Geology, Kakkanad, has filed a counter affidavit, wherein it was contended as under: - A. The main contention advanced by the petitioners is that the respondents are running the quarry and crusher units, without obtaining licence/permit and thereby violated the rules and regulations. It is submitted by the 2[nd] respondent that except the 14[th] respondent, all other quarry operators (913) were running the quarries with a mining permit/licence, granted under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. - B. Respondent No.2 has pointed out that he issued a quarrying permit on 15.06.2016 to the 9[th] respondent under the KMMC Rules, 2015, which has been issued for extracting 30,000 metric tonnes of granite building stone from an area of 0.9330 hectares of land and that the said permit is valid upto 14.06.2017. As a matter of fact, Exhibit-P1 permit has already been expired and that the 9[th] respondent has renewed the same as per rules. In fact, Exhibit-P2 indicates new survey numbers in which the permit has been renewed. The 9[th] respondent is operating the quarry with all the requisite WP(C): 36596/2016 -:10:- licences/NOC as detailed below: |1.|D & O licence|:|Validity 31/03/2017| |---|---|---|---| |2.|Explosive licence|:|Validity 31/03/2021| |3.|Shot Firer Certificate|:|Validity 03/10/2018| |4.|Consent to operate||| ||(Kerala PCB)|:|Validity 30/06/2018| |5.|Environmental Clearance|:|Validity 31/05/2021| - C. Respondent No.2 has further contended that during the inspection conducted on 14/05/2016, he has detected that the quarry has been functioning without proper benches and hence, a fine of Rs.25,000/- has been realised from the 9[th] respondent. The Village Officer has certified that no residential units are located within 100m of the quarry in question and hence, the averments to the petitioners are only apprehensions. - D. It is also stated that the 10[th] respondent is having a valid quarrying permit issued by the 2[nd] respondent enabling him to quarry 35,000 metric tons of granite building stone from an area of 98.34 Ares of land in Sy. No.463/3B of Thirumarady village and that the permit granted on 23.11.2016 is valid upto 22.11.2017. the 10[th] respondent has obtained the following, in addition to the mining permit: |1.|D & O licence|:|Validity 31/03/2017| |---|---|---|---| |2.|Explosive licence|:|Validity 31/03/2020| |3.|Mining Mater Certificate|:|| |4.|Consent to operate||| ||(Kerala PCB)|:|Validity 21/10/2017| - E. Respondent No.2 has further stated that in the case of 10[th] respondent, he has conducted an inspection and found that the 10[th] respondent has carried out illicit extraction of 10,000 metric tonnes of granite building stone from outside the permit area and hence, an amount of Rs.7,45,000/- was realised on 31/08/16, being the royalty, price, and fine as per rules. It is also submitted that, no complaints are prevailing against the 10[th] respondent. The quarry in question is having sufficient distance clearance as per the rules. However, the WP(C): 36596/2016 -:11:- allegations leveled against the crusher unit is to be answered by the 4[th] respondent. - F. It is further submitted that, the 11[th] respondent is having a valid quarrying lease granted under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules. The lease was granted on 31/03/2006 and is valid up to 30/03/2018. The Village Officer, Thirumarady, in his Certificate vide No 252/16 dated 30/03/16, has stated that, the 11[th] respondent has properly fenced the lease area and erected necessary sign boards pertaining to the quarrying operation. From the aforesaid report, it become obvious that the allegations of encroachment leveled against the 11[th] respondent is without any substance. The 11[th ] respondent, in addition to the quarrying lease, has obtained the following licenses. |1.|D & O licence|:|Validity 31/03/2017| |---|---|---|---| |2.|Explosive licence|:|Validity 31/03/2018| |3.|Consent to operate||| ||(Kerala PCB)|:|Validity 30/06/2018| - G. It is further submitted that consequent to a complaint received from the local residents, 2[nd] respondent inspected the quarry of 11[th] respondent on 12/02/16 and a series of violations were detected. Consequently, a demand notice vide No. DOE/396/E1/16 dated 17/12/16 was issued to 11[th] respondent, with instruction to remit Rs 25,000/- for violating the lease conditions, as evident from Annexure-R2(a). - H. It is further submitted that the 12[th] respondent was granted a quarrying permit for an area of 0.0930 Hectares of land in Sy No. 468/281 of Thirumarady village, Muvattupuzha taluk, under the Consolidated Royalty Payment System of Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 and that the permit is valid up to 07/02/2017. The quarrying permit has been granted, in compliance to the direction of this Court in its judgment dated 15/01/2016 in WP(C) No. 1772/2016, wherein, the 2[nd] respondent was directed to renew the earlier permit which was valid on 09/01/2015. It is also submitted that the allegations with respect to encroachment outside the permit area will be properly enquired by the 2[nd] respondent respondent. The 12[th] respondent is operating the quarry with WP(C): 36596/2016 -:12:- the following licenses: 1. D & O licence : Validity 07/02/2017 2. Explosive licence : Validity 31/03/2019 3. Consent to operate (Kerala PCB) : Validity 07/02/2017 - I. It is submitted that the 13[th] respondent is having a valid quarrying permit issued by the 2[nd] respondent dated 18/04/16, permitting to extract 30,000 metric tonnes of granite building stone from an area of 76.70 Ares in Sy. Nos. 464/3-1, 464/3-2 of Thirumarady Village and that the said permit is valid upto 17/04/2017. The 13[th] respondent is operating with the following licenses: 1. D & O licence : Validity 08/03/2017 2. Consent to operate (Kerala PCB) : Validity 08/03/2017 3. Appointment of Mines Mate : 4. Explosive licence : 31/03/2020 - J. It is further submitted that the aforesaid quarrying permit has been granted to the 13[th] respondent, in compliance to the judgment of this Court in WP(C) No. 9916/16 dated 15/03/16. It is also submitted that the 2[nd] respondent has realised a fine of Rs.25,000/- from the 13[th] respondent on 11/02/16, when it was detected that the alleged quarry has not properly maintained by providing the safety measures. However, all the distance, clearance as per the rule is observed, while granting the permit. The averments with respect to the functioning of the crusher unit is to be answered by the 4[th] respondent. - K. It is further submitted that the quarrying permit granted to the 14[th] respondent has already been expired and hence, the quarry is not functioning now. Based on a complaint received from the local residents. the 2[nd] respondent inspected the quarry of the 14[th] respondent on 12/02/2016, and detected certain violations in the permit conditions, in addition to the illegal extraction of 2812.5 MT of Granite (building stone) from outside the permit area. In this context, a notice vide No. DOE/396/E1/16 dated 09/12/2016 was issued to the 14[th] respondent, with a direction to remit Rs.2,12,500/- being the royalty, price, and fine for the unauthorised extraction, WP(C): 36596/2016 -:13:- evidenced by Annexure-R2(b). - L. It is further submitted that the aspect as to whether the respondents are operating crusher units as per the condition of the consent issued by the Pollution Control Board is to be answered by that authority. The respondents operating the quarry units with all the requisite licenses and under the strength of various directions issued by the Court. The 9[th] respondent has obtained a valid environmental clearance, in addition to other licenses. The requirement of environmental clearance is not mandated for the 11[th] respondent, who is having a valid quarrying lease. - M. Finally, it is submitted that the 2[nd] respondent will take all the effective measures to prevent any violation of the condition of permit/licence and that the 2[nd] respondent has stopped issuance of transit pass to those respondents, without an environmental clearance, in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition filed against the functioning of quarries without environmental clearance. 13. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. ## 14. In unreported judgment dated 30.06.2020 in **B. Radhakrishna** **Menon v. State of Kerala and Ors.** [W.P.(C) No.12109 of 2020], at paragraph 45, this Court held as under: “45. Placing reliance on the above decisions, the learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that a public interest writ petition which lacks _bona fides_ , lack of particulars satisfying the requirements of a PIL, deserves to be dismissed with costs. Having regard to decisions considered in _**Mythri Residents Association v. Secretary, Tripunithura Municipality and Others,** [2019 KHC 832]_ , it has been summarised by the journal thus: WP(C): 36596/2016 -:14:- “(1) The Courts must encourage genuine and bona fide PIL and effectively discourage and curb the PIL filed for extraneous considerations. (2) Instead of every individual Judge devising his own procedure for dealing with the public interest litigation, it would be appropriate for each High Court to properly formulate rules for encouraging the genuine PIL and discouraging the PIL filed with oblique motives. Consequently, we request that the High Courts who have not yet framed the rules, should frame the rules within three months. The Registrar General of each High Court is directed to ensure that a copy of the rules prepared by the High Court is sent to the Secretary General of this Court immediately thereafter. (3) The Courts should prima facie verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL. (4) The Courts should be prima facie satisfied regarding the correctness of the contents of the petition before entertaining a PIL. (5) The Courts should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest is involved before entertaining the petition. (6) The Courts should ensure that the petition which involves larger public interest, gravity and urgency must be given priority over other petitions. (7) The Courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation. (8) The Courts should also ensure that the petitions filed by busybodies for extraneous and ulterior motives must be discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or by adopting similar novel methods to curb frivolous petitions and the petitions filed for extraneous considerations. (9) The misuse of public interest litigation is a serious matter of concern for the judicial process. (10) Both this Court and the High Courts are flooded with litigations and are burdened by arrears. (11) Frivolous or motivated petitions, ostensibly invoking the public interest detract from the time and attention which courts WP(C): 36596/2016 -:15:- must devote to genuine causes. (12) This Court has a long list of pending cases where the personal liberty of citizens is involved. (13) Those who await trial or the resolution of appeals against orders of conviction have a legitimate expectation of early justice. (14) It is a travesty of justice for the resources of the legal system to be consumed by an avalanche of misdirected petitions purportedly filed in the public interest which, upon due scrutiny, are found to promote a personal, business or political agenda. (15) This has spawned an industry of vested interests in litigation. (16) There is a grave danger that if this state of affairs is allowed to continue, it would seriously denude the efficacy of the judicial system by detracting from the ability of the court to devote its time and resources to cases which legitimately require attention. (17) Worse still, such petitions pose a grave danger to the credibility of the judicial process. (18) This has the propensity of endangering the credibility of other institutions and undermining public faith in democracy and the rule of law. (19) This will happen when the agency of the court is utilised to settle extra-judicial scores. Business rivalries have to be resolved in a competitive market for goods and services. (20) Political rivalries have to be resolved in the great hall of democracy when the electorate votes its representatives in and out of office. (21) Courts resolve disputes about legal rights and entitlements. (22) Courts protect the rule of law. (23) There is a danger that the judicial process will be reduced to a charade, if disputes beyond the ken of legal parameters occupy the judicial space.” 15. The permit issued by the 2[nd] respondent – Geologist, Department of Mining and Geology, Kakkanad vide No. 23/16-17/MM/GS/QP/DOE/ 1548/E2/16 dated 15.06.2016 is reproduced: WP(C): 36596/2016 -:16:- **==> picture [402 x 596] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 -:17:- 16. The licence issued by the Joint Controller of Explosives, Chennai, respondent No.21, vide No. E/SC/KL/22/1385 (E58210) dated 15.03.2016 [Ext.R9(b)] is reproduced: **==> picture [377 x 534] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 -:18:- **==> picture [414 x 326] intentionally omitted <==** 17. The consent of variation order issued by the 4[th] respondent – Pollution Control Board, represented by its Member Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram vide No.PCB/EKM/DO2/IOR-35/2013 dated 14.03.2016 is reproduced. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:19:- **==> picture [375 x 509] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 ## -:20:- **==> picture [341 x 440] intentionally omitted <==** 18. The Shot Fire’s certificate No.E/Se/KL/30/648(E76015) issued by the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, Ernakulam dated 03.10.2013 is reproduced: WP(C): 36596/2016 -:21:- **==> picture [416 x 603] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 -:22:- **==> picture [403 x 572] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 -:23:- 19. Proceedings of the 5[th] respondent – State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, bearing No.538/SEIA/EC3/3881/2014 dated 01.06.2016 is extracted hereunder: ## “ _Proceedings of the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority_ Present Prof (Dr.) K.P. Joy, Chairman, Dr. J. Subhashini, Member and Sri P. Mara Pandiyan, LAS, Kerala Member Secretary Sub: SEIAA- Environmental clearance for the quarry project in Sy.No. 567/1-2, 567/2B2, 568/1-1, 568/2-2, 569/1-3, 569/1-5, 567/2A, 567/2B1, Thirumarady Village & Panchayat, Muvattupuzha Taluk, Ernakulam District, Kerala by Sri. Nizamudheen K.S. for the quarry project -Granted-Orders issued. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY No. 538/SEIAA/EC3/3881/2014 Dated, Thiruvananthapuram 1.06.2016 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Read: 1. Application dated 13.08.20154 submitted by Nizamudheen K.S., Karukunnathu (H), Peringala P.O., Pallikkara, Emakulam District District-683565. 2. Minutes of the 45[th] meeting of SEAC held on 11/12--09-2015. 3. Minutes of the 53 meeting of SEAC held on 25/26-02-2016. 4. Minutes of the 52[nd] meeting of SEIAA held on 29-04-2016. ## **Environmental Clearance No.82/2016.** Sri. Nizamudheen K.S., vide his application received on 13.08.2015, has sought Environmental Clearance under EIA Notification, 2006 for the Proposed Expansion of Building Stone Quarry in survey No. 567/1-2, 567/2B2, 568/1-1, 568/2-2, 569/1-3, 569/1-5, 567/2A, 567/2B1, Thirumarady Village &Panchayat, Muvattupuzha Taluk, Ernakulam District, Kerala for an area of 3.9662 Hectares. The project comes under Category B, Activity 1(a), (1) as per the Schedule of EIA Notification 2006 (since it is below 50 hectares) and as per O.M. No. L-11011/47/2011-1A.II(M) dated 18 May 2012 of Ministry of Environment and Forests. It is further categorized as Category B2 as per the O.M. No. J-13012/12/2013- LA-II (1) dt. 24.12.2013 of Ministry of Environment and Forests, since the area of the project is below 25 hectares. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:24:- ## **Basic information** ## xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2. The proposal was considered in the 45[th] SEAC meeting held on 11[th] and 12[th] September, 2015 under agenda Item No.45.05. The Committee observed that mining plan is not in accordance with KMMC Rules, 2015 and hence, the proponent was directed to submit a revised mining plan. The Committee decided to DEFER the proposal for field inspection. Subsequently, field visit to the quarry site was carried out on 17.09.2015 by the sub-committee of SEAC, Kerala, comprising Sri P. Sreekumaran Nair and Sri. John Mathai. The Proponent with his representatives was also present at the site. The details of the Field Inspection Report are given below: "The project is an active quarry located at about one km north east of Navolimattom near Mannathur. This quarry area of 3.9662 ha. falling in own land is relatively flat on the top and moderate to steep sloping to west on the lower part, partly exposing hard rock. The elevation ranges from 120m in the west to 190m in the east. The rock type is mostly fractured charnockite suite of rocks with steep foliation. Major faults are not observed in the site. On the western side of the lease area, steep cutting of the old workings are seen while to the east benches are under formation. Pockets of weathered rock with about 2m thick over burden (OB) and top soil is seen in the upper part. The removed OB is stocked in the land of the proponent at a lower level. Being an elevated land, streams are not seen in the site. However fairly good seepage of water is seen in the rainy season at the interface of rock and OB. The entire drainage from the elevated land including the quarry is partly channelized into the abandoned quarry pit on the western side from where it flows out through a narrow first order ephemeral stream. The area in general supports patches of rubber plantation. Floral biodiversity is not observed as the quarry area is mostly cleared of vegetation. Haulage road to the upper level is formed but not provided with hard surfacing. Dwelling units are are noted on the NE side but not in the immediate vicinity of 100 m. The water demand of the quarry is met from the old quarry pit which acts as a RWH structure. Accommodation to workers and canteen facilities are not observed. The unit does not have an associated crusher. Based on an overall evaluation of the site, the quarry operations may be recommended with following conditions: 1. Fencing should be provided all around the lease area. The steep cut faces of the old workings should be further demarcated, fenced and to be left as danger zone. 2. Over burden must be stored in the designated places and provided with protective support walls. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:25:- 3. Part of the drainage from the quarry is currently directed to the old pit that acts as RWH structure. However part of it flows out as overland sheet flow. A lined catchwater drain should be provided at the lower elevation leading to the abandoned quarry pit which is now RWH structure. 4. The water from the RWH structure should be let out only after clarification/desiltation for which a suitable structure is essential at the outlet. It may be important to provide a check dam in the outlet point of the channel to arrest all fine particles and to clarify water before it is let out. The deposited silt must also be cleaned periodically. 5. Considering the topography, garland drains need not be insisted upon. 6. The main haulage road formed in the quarry must be maintained in motorable condition. The approach road to the quarry from the main road is not maintained at all. This road should also be maintained in good motorable condition by the proponent. 7. In the absence of perennial streams in the vicinity, ultimate depth of mine will depend on the possible benches of 5m width and 5m height in the lease area. Other items from general conditions like; a) Appropriate sign boards should be displayed, b) The blasting time must be displayed and strictly adhered to, c) The PPV values must be less than 10 mm/sec, d) Steps to be taken to limit fly rock to within the lease area. Rock fragments should not fall anywhere outside the lease area, e) Dust suppression mechanism must be in place, f) A belt of trees (Vegetation belt) should be maintained all around the quarry but must be maintained till the entire life of quarry, g) A separate small plot to be maintained in the premise to preserve rare and endemic species listed in the biodiversity assessment and the promised activity under CSR may be added" 3. The proponent has submitted the Mining plan as per KMMC Rule, 2015. The proposal was placed before SEAC in its 53 meeting held on 25[th] and 26[th] of September, 2016 for further appraisal. The Committee after examining the mining plan, pre-feasibility report, field inspection report and all other documents, decided to recommend for issuance of EC subject to general conditions in addition to the following specific conditions for mining projects. 1. Fencing should be provided all around the lease area. The steep cut faces of the old workings should be further demarcated, fenced and to be left as danger zone. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:26:- 2. Over burden must be stored in the designated places and provided with protective support walls. 3. Part of the drainage from the quarry is currently directed to the old pit that acts as RWH structure. However part of it flows out as overland sheet flow. A lined catchwater drain should be provided at the lower elevation leading to the abandoned quarry pit which is now RWH structure. 4. The water from the RWH structure should be let out only after clarification/desiltation for which a suitable structure is essential at the outlet. It may be important to provide a check dam in the outlet point of the channel to arrest all fine particles and to clarify water before it is let out. The deposited silt must also be cleaned periodically. The main haulage road formed in the quarry must be maintained in motorable condition. The approach road to the quarry from the main road is not maintained at all. This road should also be maintained in good motorable condition by the proponent. 4. The 52[nd] meeting of SEIAA held on 29.04.16, examined the recommendations proposed by the inspection team given in para 2 and the recommendation of the 53 meeting of SEAC, given in the para 3 and decided to issue E.C with all the conditions proposed by the inspection team as well as the general conditions for mining projects. 5. Environmental clearance as per the EIA notification 2006 is hereby accorded for the proposed Building Stone Quarry project in survey No. 567/1-2, 567/2B2, 568/1-1, 568/2-2, 569/1-3, 569/1-5, 567/2A, 567/2B1, of Thirumarady Village & Panchayat, Muvattupuzha Taluk, Ernakulam District, Kerala for an area of 3.9662 Hectares., subject to all the suggestion of the inspection team mentioned in para 2 above specific conditions stipulated in para 3, all the environmental impact mitigation and management measures undertaken by the project proponent in the Form I and other documents submitted to SELAA and the mitigation measures proposed in the table in para 1 above. The assurances and clarifications given by the proponent will be deemed to be a part of these proceedings as if incorporated herein. Also the general conditions for projects stipulated for mining, appended hereto will be applicable and have to be strictly adhered to. 6. The clearance issued will also be subject to full and effective implementation of all the undertakings given in the application WP(C): 36596/2016 -:27:- form, mitigation measures as assured in the Environment Management Plan and the mining features including progressive mine closure plan as submitted with the application and relied on for grant of this clearance. The above undertakings and the conditions and undertakings in chapter 4 of Mining plan (Mining), Chapter 5 of Mining plan (Blasting), Chapter 11 (EMP) of the Mining Plan and Chapter 12 for Progressive Mine Closure Plan as submitted will be deemed to be part of these proceedings as conditions as undertaken by the proponent, as if incorporated herein. 7. Validity shall be 5 years subject to inspection by SEIAA on annual basis and compliance of the conditions, subject to earlier review of E.C in case of violation or non-compliance of conditions or genuine complaints from residents within the security area of the quarry. Environmental Clearance is therefore granted to the Building Stone Quarry project of Nizamudheen K.S, Karukunnathu (H), Peringala P.O., Pallikkara, Ernakulam District District-683565 subject to all the above mentioned conditions. 8. Compliance of the conditions herein will be monitored by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority or its authorised offices. i) Necessary assistance for entry and inspection should be provided by the project proponent and those who are engaged or entrusted by him to the staff for inspection or monitoring. ii) Instances of violation if any shall be reported to the District Collector, Ernakulam to take legal action under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. iii) The given address for correspondence with the authorised signatory of the project is Nizhamudheen K.S., Kunnathu (H), Peringala P.O., Pallikkara, Ernakulam District – 683565. Sd/P.Mara Pandiyan, I.A.S Member Secretary (SEIAA) & Additional Chief Secretary to Government Environment & Forest Department Government of Kerala.” 20. Licence No.11/16-17 issued by the 3[rd] respondent Panchayat dated 16.04.2016 is extracted hereunder: WP(C): 36596/2016 -:28:- **==> picture [396 x 560] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 -:29:- **==> picture [406 x 568] intentionally omitted <==** WP(C): 36596/2016 -:30:- 21. Demand notice dated 09.12.2016, issued by the Geologist, District office of the Mining & Geology Department – 2[nd] respondent [AnnexureR2(b)], is extracted hereunder: “No.DEO/396/E1/16 Dated: 09.12.2016 ## DEMAND NOTICE Sub:- Mines & Minerals – Minor Minerals – Quarrying of Granites – Violation of the Conditions of Permit – Action Taken – Regarding - Ref:- 1. Quarrying Permit issued to you bearing No.62/1516/MM/GS/GRPS/DOE/E3/15 dated 12.11.2015. 2. Complaint received by this office from the inhabitants of Mavolinattom & Mannathoor areas 3. Spot Inspection held from this office on 12.02.2006. 4. The Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1967. 5. Show cause notice issued to you from this office dated 04.04.2015. …… Your attention is invited to the references cited above. As per the permit issued to you vide: reference No.1 above, you were granted permission for quarrying granite from an area of 0.6627 hectares of land, comprised in Sy. Nos.466/3, 466/3-1 and 466/2 of Thirumaradi Village of Muvattupuzha Taluk. On the basis of the complaints received in this office, cited as reference No.2 above, a spot inspection was held on 12.02.2016 of the area in question, when it was revealed that you have been doing quarrying of granite in the area permitted, in violation of die conditions laid down in the WP(C): 36596/2016 -:31:- Permit issued to you. You have not demarcated the quarry by installing pillars around it and fencing the area as was mandated in the Permit, that you have not exhibited the sign Board, exhibiting the Blasting Tire etc., on it. That apart, it is satisfied that you have mined granite from an area, outside the area permitted to you, of a quantity of 1125 cubic metres of granite. As per the Notice issued to you, as cited in reference No.5 above, you were directed to explain your stand in this behalf, but there has been no response from you, till this date. Therefore, you are hereby directed to remit a sum of Rs.1,67,500 towards royalty, for un-authorisedly mining granite of a quantity of 1125 cubic metres above the quantity permitted to be quarried, Rs.1,31,000 towards the value of the granite at the rate of Rs.281 2.5 per metric tonne, and Rs.10,000/- by way of Penalty, making a total amount of Rs.2,12,500/- as per the challan enclosed along with this at the Treasury and produce the original of the challan Receipt at this office. Otherwise, you are hereby intimated that recovery steps will be initiated against you, as per the rules. Sd/Geologist. Enclosure: As above To Shri George Chummar, Edappalakkad House, Piramadam P.O. cc: Village Officer, Thirumaradi.” 22. Demand notice dated 17.12.2016 issued by the Geologist, District office of the Mining & Geology Department – 2[nd] respondent [AnnexureR2(a)], is extracted hereunder: WP(C): 36596/2016 -:32:- “No.DEO/396/E1/16 Dated 17.12.2016 ## DEMAND NOTICE Sub:- Mines & Minerals – Minor Minerals – Mining of Granites – violation of the conditions of Mining – Action Taken – Regarding - Ref:- 1. Quarrying Lease issued to you No.731/0506/9011/M3/2005 dated 15.03.2006. 2. Complaint preferred to this office by the residents of Navalimattam and Mannathoor. 3. Inspection of the land in question from this office, held on 12.02.2006. 4. The Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1967. 5. Show cause notice issued to you from this office dated 04.04.2016. …… Kindly see the above-said references. You were given quarrying Lease as per reference cited above as No.1, for mining of granite from an area of 1.5900 hectares comprised in Survey No.192/1A in Thirumaradi Village, Muvattupuzha Taluk. Following the complaint made to this office, cited as reference No.2 above, when an inspection was conducted from this office, it has come to notice that you have been quarrying the granite in violation of the conditions laid down in the Lease Agreement. The area from which you were permitted to conduct quarrying operations, had not been demarcated by installing Pillars and fencing the area, that you have not exhibited the sign board, and the board exhibiting the blasting tine, which is in violation of the conditions of the Lease. That apart, it has been satisfied that the quarry, wherein there is full of water, has not been WP(C): 36596/2016 -:33:- demarcated with fence. A notice was issued from this office, vide: reference No.5 above, directing you to show cause against the above-said violations. However, there has not been any response to the said notice from your side, 11 this date. Therefore, you are hereby directed to remit with the Treasury a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards penalty, as per the Challan enclosed along with this, and produce the original of the Challan Receipt to this office. Otherwise, recovery steps will be taken against you as per the rules, which fact is hereby intimated to you. Enclosure: as above Sd/- Geologist. Shri T.K.Joseph, Thekkekkara House, Mannathoor P.O. cc: Village Officer, Thirumaradi.” 23. Material on record discloses that without verifying from the concerned authorities, as to whether quarrying permits and other required licenses are obtained from the competent authorities, writ petition has been filed. From the counter affidavit of the 9[th] respondent and the statement of the Geologist, District Office of the Department of Mining & Geology – 2[nd] respondent, it could be seen that except the 14[th] respondent, others have granted quarrying permits. Whenever violations are noticed, action as per the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 has been taken by the respondents. Consent to operate the crusher units has also been given. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:34:- 24. The Geologist – 2[nd] respondent, has further stated that encroachment, if any, would be enquired into. Allegations made by the petitioners have been substantially refuted by the respondents with documents. Further, no material has been produced as to whether the quarrying permit/licence of the respondents have been renewed/ extended from the dates mentioned in the counter affidavit filed by the 2[nd] respondent – Geologist. 25. If the quarry owners intended to continue with the quarrying activity, and application, if any, submitted by them, be verified thoroughly, with reference to all the statutory requirements, and accordingly, decision be taken. With the above said directions, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- **S. MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE** Sd/- **MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE** Krj //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO C.J. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:35:- ## **APPENDIX** ## PETITIONER EXHIBITS - P1 PHOTO COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT OBTAINED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. - P2 PHOTO COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENSE NO E/SC/KL/22/1385/(E28210) DTD 5/11/2013 TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT ISSUED BY THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, CHENNAI. - P3 PHOTO COPY OF THE SIGN BOARD PUT UP AT THE ENTRANCE OF HIS QUARRY. - P4 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE QUARRY. - P5 COPY OF SIGN BOARD PUT UP BY 10TH RESPONDENT AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE QUARRY. - P5(A) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P5 - P6 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING HIS QUARRY. - P7 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SIGN BOARD PUT UP BY THE 10TH RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF HIS CRUSHER UNIT. - P7(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P7 - P8 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS REGARDING THE CRUSHER UNIT RUN BY THE 10TH RESPONDENT. - P9 COPY OF THE ORDER NO 731/2005-06/9011/M3/2005 DTD 15/3/2006 OF THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY. - P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE DEED EXECUTED ON 31/3/2006. - P11 TRUE COPY OF THE SIGN BOAR PUT UP CRUSHER UNIT BY NAME THEKKEKKARA GRANITES. - P11(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT -P11. P12 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE QUARRY OF THE 11TH RESPONDENT. - P13 COPY OF THE SIGN BOARD PUT UP BY 12TH RESPONDENT REGARDING THE QUARRY. - P13(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P.13 P14 COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 13/3/2015 OBTAINED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:36:- - P15 COPY OF THE CONSENT DTD 16/6/2015 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT OBTAINED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. - P16 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE QUARRY OF 13TH RESPONDENT SMT. BINDU. - P17 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DTD 12/11/2015 FOR EXTRACTING GRANITE (BUILDING STONE)ISSUED BY THE N2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 14TH RESPONDENT. - P18 COPY OF THE CONSENT DTD 26/6/2015 TO THE 14TH RESPONDENT POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, - P19 COPY OF THE CONSENT VARIATION ORDER DTD 28/1/2016 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. - P20 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE QUARRY OF THE 14TH RESPONDENT. - P21 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE CHECK DAM - P22 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT CONDITION OF KOOLOR HILL. - P23 COPY OF THE MINUTES OF MEETING OF THIRUMARADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH ON 22/1/2016 AT 3.00 P M., - P23(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT-P23. - P24 COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SAID MEETING OBTAINED UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. - P24(A) COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P24 - P25 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE LOCAL PEOPLE TO 3RD RESPONDENT. - P25 PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P25. - P26 COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 2/6/2016 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, R.D.O OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. - P26(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P26. - P27 COPY OF THE REPORT T.R. NO 70/16 DTD 28/4/2016 SENT ALONGWITH P 26. P27(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P27. WP(C): 36596/2016 -:37:- - P28 COPY OF THE REPORT TR NO 71/16 DTD 28/4/2016 SENT ALONG WITH P26. - P28(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P28. - P29 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT TR NO 72/16 DTD 28/4/2016 SENT ALONGWITH P29. - 29(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT-P29. - P30 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT R.T.O, MUVATTUPUZHA. - P30(A) PHOTO COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P30 ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:-** - R9(A): COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT NO.23/1617/MM/GS/QP/DOE/1548/E2/16 DATED 15.06.2016. - R9(B):COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED BY THE 21ST RESPONDENT NO.E/SC/KL/22/1825 (E58210). - R9(C):COPY OF THE CONSENT VARIATION ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT NO.PCB/EKM/DO2/IQR-35DATED 14.03.2016. - R9(D):COPY OF THE MINING MATE'S CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY NO.MR/SZ/0194 ISSUED BY THE ZONAL SECRETARY, BOARD OF MINING EXAMINATION, SOUTH ZONE, BENGALURU DATED 18.7.2012. - R9(E):COPY OF THE SHOT FIRER'S CERTIFICATE NO.E/SE/KL/30/648(e76015) ISSUED BY THE DY. CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, ERNAKUKAM DATED 03.10.2013. - R9(F): - COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT NO.538/SEIAA/EC3/3881/2014 DATED 01.062016. - R9(G) :- COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.11/16-17 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.04.2016. - ANNEXURE-R2(A): COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.12.2016. ANNEXURE-R2(B): COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 09.12.2016. //TRUE COPY// P.A TO C.J.