M/S J & S Granite Company v. Pramadom Grama Panchayat & Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **WEDNESDAY, THE 6[TH] DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944** **WP(C) NO. 20898 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **M/S. J & S GRANITES COMPANY AGED 66 YEARS MUPPRAMON, V-KOTTAYAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. K. SADANANDAN. , PIN - 689565 BY ADVS. ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL S.SREEDEV RONY JOSE LEO LUKOSE SUZANNE KURIAN CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 PRAMADOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT LAKKOOR, MALLASSERY P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-689 646. , PIN - 689646** - **2 SECRETARY PRAMADOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, LAKKOOR, MALLASSERY P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA , PIN - 689646** - **3 ADDL.R3.AJI K. AGED 40 YEARS, PRESIDENT, THUDIYURILIPPARA DEVASWOM, S/O. KUNJU KUNJU.A.K., KANJIRAPPARA, VALLIKKODU KOTTAYAM, V-KOTTAYAM PO, PATHANAMTHITTA-689656.** - **4 ADDL.R4.ROY THOMAS AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. THOMAS JOSHUA, CHAIRMAN, GRAMA REKSHA SAMATHI, V-KOTTAYAM.P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-689656. (ADDL.R3 & R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 5-7-** W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 2 : **2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN WP(C). BY ADVS. JACOB P.ALEX RESHMI JACOB JOSEPH P.ALEX MANU SANKAR P. AMAL AMIR ALI BOBY THOMAS** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 3 : ## **J U D G M E N T** _Dated this the 6[th] day of July, 2022_ The petitioner, a granite Company, seeks to direct the 2[nd] respondent to consider Ext.P7 representation in the light of Ext.P5 notification. 2. The petitioner states that the petitioner holds a Letter of Intent issued by the Director of Mining and Geology for conducting quarrying operations in various Survey numbers in V Kottayam Village in Konni Taluk in Pathanamthitta District. The period of Letter of Intent has been extended until further orders. 3. The petitioner states that the petitioner has all requisite permits and licences, and the Consent of the Pollution Control Board. The petitioner also holds Explosives Licence. The petitioner was granted Ext.P2 Environmental Clearance (EC). W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 4 : 4. The validity of the Enviornmental Clearance was originally for 5 years and it would be expiring on 09.08.2020. According to the petitioner, as per extant rules, the validity of EC of a mining project should be the project life as estimated by the Appraisal Committee. The petitioner therefore approached this Court filing W.P(C) No.12420 of 2020. This Court held that limiting the validity of EC to five years, when the project life for mining is for a longer period, is arbitrary and not in accordance with the EIA Notification, 2006. This Court therefore directed the Authorities to revalidate the EC in accordance with the project life. 5. The petitioner states that in the meanwhile, the petitioner was issued with Ext.P3 Trade Licence by the 2[nd] respondent-Secretary, Pramadom Grama Panchayat. Ext.P3 Trade Licence was issued on the basis of Ext.P2 Environmental Clearance. The 2[nd] respondent as per Ext.P4 cancelled the Trade Licence on the ground that the petitioner does not possess a valid Environmental Clearance. W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 5 : 6. The petitioner states that subsequently the Government of India amended the Rules by issuing Ext.P5 Notification dated 12.04.2022. In paragraph No.9 of the Notification, it was made clear that Environmental Clearance granted for a mining project has to be treated as valid for the project life as laid down in the mining plan approved by the competent authority. 7. The petitioner would submit that in view of Ext.P5 Notification, the EC granted to the petitioner is valid for the project life laid down in the Mining Plan approved by the Mining Authority. In view of Ext.P5 Notification and Ext.P6 certificate issued by the Geologist wherein the life of the mine was determined as 20 years, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 representation dated 16.06.2020 to the 2[nd] respondent seeking to revoke Ext.P4 order. However, the 2[nd] respondent is refusing to consider and pass orders on the representation. It is in such circumstances that the petitioner W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 6 : is before this Court. 8. The Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and contested the writ petition. The Standing Counsel denied all the material allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition. It is submitted on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 that two other writ petitions are pending before this Court relating to issuance of Trade Licence. 9. The EC was issued originally to the petitioner for a period of 5 years. Ext.P5 Notification would state that the prior Environmental Clearance granted for Mining Projects shall be valid for the project life as laid down in the Mining Plan approved and renewed by the competent authority, from time to time, subject to a maximum of thirty years, whichever is earlier. The petitioner is relying on Ext.P6 certificate issued by the Geologist. Ext.P6 cannot be treated as a document validly deciding the mining period. The issue has to be decided by SIEAA, contended the Standing W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 7 : Counsel. 10. The additional 3[rd] respondent impleaded in the writ petition also opposed the writ petition vehemently. The additional 3[rd] respondent submitted that there is a temple existing hardly 15 metres away from the quarry and the existence of this temple was suppressed by the petitioner while obtaining all licences and approvals. The additional 3[rd] respondent has approached this Court aggrieved by the permission granted to the petitioner in W.P(C) No.3559 of 2021. As the petitioner has suppressed material facts in obtaining various licences, consents and clearances, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 11. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 12. The issue agitated in the writ petition is relating to non-grant/non-renewal of trade licence. A Division Bench of this Court has held in _**Nagaroor Grama Panchayat v. Salim**_ [2016 (3) KLT 82] that the decision making process by the W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 8 : Panchayat authorities under the D&O Rules has to be independently made and would not be made depending upon anything which is not statutorily insisted or permitted to be relied on in such proceedings. The provisions of Sections 232, 233 and 234 of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 as well as the contents of the D&O Rules clearly show that the provisions of the Act and the D&O Rules stand by themselves and those provisions are not dependent on any decision to be rendered on the basis of any other statute. 13 **.** In view of the law thus laid down by this Court in **Nagaroor Grama Panchayat** (supra), this Court is of the view that respondents 1 and 2 are bound to consider Ext.P7 representation submitted by the petitioner and take a decision in the matter of revocation of the order cancelling the Trade Licence of the petitioner. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of setting aside Ext.P4 and directing the 2[nd] respondent to consider Ext.P7 representation W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 9 : submitted by the petitioner, in the light of the law laid down by this Court in **Nagaroor Grama Panchayat** (supra), after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the additional 3[rd] respondent. A decision in this regard shall be taken within a period of three weeks. Sd/- N. NAGARESH, JUDGE smm/08.07.2022 W.P(C) No.20898 of 2022 : 10 : ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20898/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DTD. 24.06.2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY Exhibit P(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.02.2022 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY.** - **Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE DTD. 10.08.2015 ISSUED BY THE SEIAA.** - **Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TRADE LICENSE DATED 04.04.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.05.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 12.04.2022 BEARING NUMBER S.O. 1807(E) ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE, UNION OF INDIA.** - **Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 05.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE GEOLOGIST, PATHANAMTHITTA.** - **Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.06.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.06.2022 IN WP(C) NO. 19137/2022 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.**