Haridasan T. v. Panangad Grama Panchayat and The Secretary, Panangad Grama Panchayat

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 28TH BHADRA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 7645 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER:** **HARIDASAN T., AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. DAMODARAN NAIR, THAROL HOUSE, EKAROOL P.O., UNNIKULAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673574 BY ADVS. SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE SMT.NEENU BERNATH** ## **RESPONDENTS:** |**1**|**PANANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,**| |---|---| ||**REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,**| ||**PANANGAD P.O.,**| ||**KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673612**| |**2**|**THE SECRETARY,**| ||**PANANAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,**| ||**PANANGAD P.O.,**| ||**KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673612**| ||**BY ADVS.**| ||**SRI.T.M.KHALID**| ||**SMT.K.P.SUSMITHA, SC**| **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **-:2:-** W.P.(C) No.7645/23 ## **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. -------------------------------W.P.(C) No.7645 of 2023** **---------------------------------** Dated this the 19[th] day of September, 2023 ## **JUDGMENT** Petitioner seeks for a declaration that his application for license contemplated under sections 233 and 232 of the Panchayt Raj Act has crystallized into a deemed permission and license. Petitioner also sought to quash Ext.P13 order rejecting his application. 2. After obtaining a letter of intent under rule 33(1) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 (for short 'KMMC Rules'), petitioner applied to various authorities for obtaining the necessary licenses for quarrying in a property having an extent of 3.0040 hectares situated in Kanthalad Village, Thamarassery Taluk, Kozhikode District. The mining plan submitted by the petitioner was approved on 11.01.2019 and the Environmental Clearance was granted on 20.07.2022. Subsequently, petitioner obtained an explosive license as well as a road van license and even a consent to operate from the Pollution Control Board. ## W.P.(C) No.7645/23 **-:3:-** 3. After obtaining all the above said licenses and permissions, petitioner approached the Panangad Grama Panchayat seeking permission to conduct quarrying operations. The application was submitted on 13.10.2022, which is evident from the endorsement on Ext.P8. Thereafter, on 29.10.2022, petitioner was asked to produce two additional documents, which was also submitted on 06.11.2022. After the expiry of 30 days from the submission of the documents, yet another letter was issued on 07.12.2022 by the respondent pointing out further defects in his application. Once again, petitioner submitted all the documents sought for on 26.12.2022. 4. Petitioner alleges that after he submitted all the documents demanded, an enquiry was conducted and the Secretary endorsed on his application and recommended the grant of license. However, despite the petitioner possessing all the required licenses and permissions and even after the Secretary recommending the grant of license, the Panchayat Committee declined license to the petitioner. The decision of the Panchayat referred to the existence of two other quarries already and concluded that the conduct of one more quarry would destroy the tourist attraction and the beauty of the area. W.P.(C) No.7645/23 **-:4:-** Petitioner challenges the decision of the Panchayat Committee refusing his license and also seeks for appropriate directions. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents pointing out that the petitioner has an alternative remedy before the Tribunal and that the writ petition ought to be dismissed on the said ground. It was also stated that the proposed quarry is close to the Peruvannamuzhi Dam, which is a major drinking water source of people and that the existence of a water tank is an impediment under section 42 of the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act, 2003. Referring to the application for license submitted by the petitioner, respondents contended that the documents were sought for within the prescribed time and that section 236(3) of the Panchayat Raj Act does not apply to the case of the petitioner. Respondents further alleged that the decision in Ext.P13 was taken in the best interest of the environmental balance and public health as 'Vayalada' is a well known tourist destination of the Tourism Department and considering the importance of the locality, the Panchayat possess the power to deny the license since the power to grant is always coupled with the power to reject. 6. I have heard Sri.Philip J.Vettickattu, learned counsel for W.P.(C) No.7645/23 ## **-:5:-** the petitioner as well as Smt.K.P.Susmitha, the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents. 7. Petitioner has obtained all the licenses required under law, except the license from the Panchayat and the lease deed. Ext.P1 is the letter of intent issued under rule 33(1) of the KMMC Rules, 2015. The issuance of a letter of intent under the KMMC Rules is an indication by the State that they are willing to execute a lease deed, provided, petitioner obtains all other licenses. 8. On the basis of the said letter of intent, petitioner is bound to obtain other licenses and if they are obtained, the State cannot back-out from executing the lease deed. Thus, once a person possesses a letter of intent, it conveys to the world that the registered lease deed is a foregone conclusion provided, the other licenses are obtained. 9. Possessed with the letter of intent and all other licenses, when petitioner applied to the Panchayat for grant of a license, they are bound under law to issue the license or reject the application within a specified time limit of 30 days. As this Court has held in the decision in **Abdul Kharim v. Pazhayakunummel Grama Panchayat** [2018 (4) KLT 1086 W.P.(C) No.7645/23 ## **-:6:-** (FB)] that the deeming provision contemplated under section 236(3) of the Panchayat Raj Act would come into play when the application was not found defective within the time fixed for consideration and no order was passed or communicated to the applicant within the prescribed time. 10. Though petitioner was issued with two intimations pointing out certain defects, all documents required under law were submitted by him on 26.12.2022. This is substantiated by the endorsement on Ext.P8 application wherein the Secretary has recommended grant of license after observing that all the documents have been produced. Though petitioner's application became valid with effect from 26.12.2022, the respondent did not act until they issued Ext.P13 order on 10.02.2023 rejecting his application. By the lapse of 30 days from 26.12.2022, at least petitioner has obtained a deemed license under section 236(3) of the Act. The subsequent rejection of license is not valid as by 26.01.2023 petitioner possessed a deemed license under law. 11. Since Ext.P13 order is issued after the petitioner obtained a deemed license, the same has no legal validity. In view of the above discussions, I declare that the petitioner has W.P.(C) No.7645/23 ## **-:7:-** obtained a deemed license under section 236(3) to conduct quarrying operations pursuant to Ext.P8 application. In view of the petitioner obtaining a deemed license under Ext.P13, the order rejecting his application is hereby set aside. The respondents shall issue a physical copy of the deemed license, as contemplated under law. The writ petition is allowed as above Sd/- **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE** vps W.P.(C) No.7645/23 ## **-:8:-** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED 01-6-2018** - **Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION BEARING NO.DOZ/M-2826/17 DATED 11-01-2019** - **Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE ISSUED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY DATED 20-07-2022** - **Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEIAA SIA/KL/MIN/268917/2022 1265/EC/2019/SEIAA DATED 17/12/2022** - **Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE EXPLOSIVE LICENSE DATED 5-7-2022** - **Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ROAD VAN LICENSE FOR THE CARRIAGE OF EXPLOSIVES WITH REGISTRATION NO.KL 56 A 8640, DATED 4-3-2020** - **Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 3/10/2022** - **Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11-10-2022 AND SUBMITTED ON 13-10-2022** - **Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE STANDING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN OF THE 1 ST RESPONDENT BEARING NO.400968/RPTL19/GPO/2022/4776/(1), DATED 29-10-2022** **Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 6-11-2022** W.P.(C) No.7645/23 **-:9:-** **Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7-12-2022 ISSUED BY THE 2 ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26-12- 2022 Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION BEARING NO.7/1 DATED 10-2-2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER**