Philip Thomas v. Geologist District Office of the Mining and Geology Department, Kottayam, Meenadam Grama Panchayat, Village Officer Meenadam, District Magistrate / Collectorate, District Level Environmental Impacts Assessment Authority represented by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chief Town Planner, and State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **THURSDAY, THE 22[ND] DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 10036 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** **PHILIP THOMAS AGED 59 YEARS S/O. THOMAS, MUNDATTUCHUNDAYIL HOUSE, MEENADAM VILLAGE, MEENADAM P.O, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686516.** **BY ADVS. VARUGHESE M EASO SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J.** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE GEOLOGIST DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686002.** - **2 THE SECRETARY MEENADAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MEENADAM P.O, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686516.** - **3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER MEENADAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686516.** - **4 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM – 686001.** - **5 DISTRICT LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM – 686001.** - **6 THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, 2ND FLOOR, SWARAJ BHAVAN, NANTHANCODE, KOWDIYAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695003.** WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 2 : **7 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695001.** **BY ADV SHRI.SIBY CHENAPPADY, SC, MEENADOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT** **GOVT. PLEADER SMT. G.RANJITA** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 3 : ## **[CR]** ## **J U D G M E N T** ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _**Dated this the 22[nd] day of July, 2021**_ The petitioner wanted to construct a house for his family to live in. The house was proposed to be constructed in Meenadam Village of Kottayam Taluk. To construct the house, the petitioner has to remove the topsoil from the plot, in order to level the ground, for laying the foundation bed. The petitioner's son and his wife, who are the owners of the property, made an online application to the 2[nd] respondentSecretary to the Grama Panchayat, seeking to issue Development Permit. The Development Permit is required as the Geologist can issue permission to extract and transport the soil only on the basis of a Land Development Permit issued by the Panchayat. WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 4 : 2. However, the Panchayat authorities informed the petitioner that the Secretary or Grama Panchayat is not authorised to grant Land Development Permit for removal of soil. The petitioner states that the property in question is situated more than 12 feet above the road level and no vehicles including autorickshaws can ascend to the property. The 2[nd] respondent has granted only Building Permit. Unless the 2[nd] respondent issues a Development Permit also, the Geologist will not issue necessary transit pass, which would be required for levelling the land of the petitioner. The petitioner therefore seeks to direct the 1[st] respondentGeologist to grant 'No Objection Certificate' and permission to remove the red earth from the property where the house is proposed to be constructed. 3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that as per Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, it is mandatory that a building permit and a development permit are issued by concerned Local Self Government Institutions, for granting permission for removal of ordinary WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 5 : earth for construction of buildings having a plinth area of 20,000 m² and more. Issuance of 'No Objection Certificate' from the Department is not stipulated by the Rules for construction of buildings having plinth area below 20,000 square metres, contended the learned Government Pleader. 4. The 2[nd] respondent filed counter affidavit and contested the writ petition. The 2[nd] respondent stated that the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019 do not contemplate the issuance of a Development Permit for the purpose of removing ordinary earth for building construction. A perusal of Rules 4, 5 and 10 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019 makes it clear that a Development Permit is to be issued only in cases where there is development of land by means of sub-division into plots. The said position has been affirmed by the Chief Town Planner by his Ext.P8 communication dated 22.12.2020, wherein it has been clarified that if the activity contemplated is merely removing ordinary earth/filling up of land with ordinary earth for the purpose of construction, no separate permission is contemplated under the Building WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 6 : Rules. It has been further clarified that when Building Permit is issued, the permission for land development necessary for the purpose of effecting such construction, is deemed to be included in the building permit. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1, 3 to 7 and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent. 6. The question is whether the petitioner is required to obtain a Land Development Permit for getting Transit Passes from the Geologist and if so, whether the Local Self Government Institution is legally bound to issue a Development Permit to the petitioner, even in cases where construction of the building does not involve development of land. 7. A Land Development permit is issued under the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019. A Land Development permit is required for “development of land”. The term “development of land” is defined in Rule 2(ae) and reads as follows:- WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 7 : “2(ae) 'development of land' means any material change on the use of land other than for agricultural purpose brought about or intended to be brought about by filling up of the land or changing from the existing former use of the land, layout of streets and foot paths, provision of water supply, sewerage, drainage, electrification, landscaping, subdivision of land for residential plots or for other uses including layout of internal streets, developing parks, play grounds and social amenities of the like, but does not include legal partitioning of family property among heirs.” It is evident from Rule 2(ae) that for an activity to fall under the term “development of land”, there should be material change on the use of land (other than for agricultural purpose) brought about or intended to be brought about, - (i) by filling up of land, or - (ii) by changing from existing former use of the land, or - (iii) by layout of streets and footpaths, or - (iv) by provision of water supply, sewerage, drainage, electrification or landscaping - (vi) by sub-division of land for residential plots or for other uses including layout of internal streets or for developing parks, play grounds and social amenities of the like. WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 8 : However, legal partitioning of family property among heirs, would not amount to ‘development of land’. 8. Rule 4 of the KPBR, 2019 mandates that no person shall develop or redevelop any parcel of land by subdividing into plots or cause to be done without first obtaining a permit for each such development or redevelopment from the Secretary. It is to be noted that though the term ‘development of land’ as defined under Section 2(ae) would take in almost all material changes in the user of the land, a Development Permit under Rule 4 is essential only when there is subdivision into plots, of the land. 9. Rule 5(a) of the KPBR, 2019 under the head “Application for development/building permits” provides that every person other than a Central or State Government Department who intends to develop or redevelop any parcel of land by subdividing into plots shall apply in writing to the Secretary in the form in Appendix A3. An application under Rue 5 of KPBR, 2019 is required only when there is development or redevelopment involving subdivision of land WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 9 : into plots. Therefore, it is evident that in spite of the broader definition given to the term ‘development of land’ in Rule 2(ae), a Development Permit under Rues 4 and 5 of the KPBR, 2019 is required only when there is development of land by dividing land into plots. 10. In the case of the petitioner, the petitioner does not intend to subdivide his land into plots. However, in order to lay the foundation of the residential building, the petitioner wants to level the land which is situated at a higher level, by removal of ordinary earth. Rule 10 of the KPBR, 2019 deals with the requirement of approval of site and plans and issue of permit where excavation of land is involved. Rule 10 reads as follows: “ _**10.Approval of site and plans and issue of permit where excavations to a depth of more than 1.5 metres is involved**_ - (1) In the case of constructions/land developments which involve any earthwork excavation to a depth of more than 1.5 metres, if the depth of cutting is more than the horizontal distance of such cutting from the plot boundary, the following provisions shall apply: Provided that, such provisions are not necessary in cases where such excavation is carried out for construction of structures such as wells, septic tank, WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 10 : recharge pits, drainage works, compound walls and the like. (2) The application for development and/or building permit shall be submitted by the applicant as per the provisions of these rules, along with a certificate of the Institution, Architect, Building Designer, Engineer, Town Planner, Supervisor as the case may be, who has prepared and signed the plans, drawings, statements etc. as to whether permit as envisaged under rule 10 is required. (3) The application for permit shall also include sufficient copies of: - (i) dimensioned plan and sectional drawing showing the abutting road level, the levels and depths of cutting at all places in respect of excavations for building construction and land development works; (ii) drawings, specifications and details of temporary and permanent protective measures proposed; (iii) drawings, specifications and details of slabs, beams, columns, retaining walls etc. proposed at the ground floor level and below; and (iv) details of piles if any, including their drawings, specifications, erection methods and the like. (4) The Secretary shall issue permit as laid down in these rules: Provided that, if any changes or deviations are to be made, it shall satisfy the provisions of these rules and the same shall be intimated to the Secretary with revised drawings, specifications and details as the case may be. (5) Any written complaint received after the date of issue of the permit or self certified building permit from owners or occupants in the adjoining properties on the actual or possible damages to their life and property shall be acted upon by the Secretary as per the provisions in this rule: Provided that the work will not be stopped except under exceptional circumstances such as violation of approved plans and risk of danger to life and property. (6) Once the earthworks and/or constructions upto the ground level are completed as per the approved plans, the applicant may in writing intimate the same to the Secretary and request for concurrence for carrying out rest of the works. WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 11 : (7) The Secretary shall, if convinced that the works are carried out satisfactorily as per the permit(s) and provisions of this rule and no written complaint is received as in subrule (5), issue concurrence as in Appendix C for carrying out the remaining works above the ground level as per approved plans within 7 days after intimating the completion of works upto ground level: Provided that, if no objection is raised by the Secretary within the said period to the construction carried out, the applicant may continue with the work above ground level as if concurrence has been given. (8) If any complaint is received as in sub rule (5), the Secretary shall: (i) refer the matter within 5 days to the Technical Expert Committee constituted as per subrule (12) and convene a meeting of the Committee; (ii) intimate the nature of complaints to the applicant and call for details and explanation if so desired by the Committee; (iii) arrange for site inspections, hearing of the applicants and/or petitioners, verification of records and arrange for tests if so required by the Committee; and (iv) take up further action as per the recommendations of the Committee. (9) The applicant and/or the petitioner shall attend the hearing and shall also produce any details called for within the time specified, if so required by the Committee or the Secretary on its behalf (10) The Committee shall evaluate the damages and fix the compensation and/or suggest further protective measures, if any, to be taken by the applicant to solve the issues raised by the petitioner. The amount of compensation shall include the actual cost of restoration as decided by the Committee and an additional 30% as solatium: Provided that the process of the Committee shall be completed within a total duration of 3 weeks. (11) Concurrence shall be issued by the Secretary, after ensuring that the protective measures are carried out to the satisfaction of the Committee and the compensation is paid by the applicant as per the decision of the Committee. The actual expenses of the WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 12 : Committee as intimated by the Secretary shall be paid by the applicant. (12) For the purpose of this rule, Government may, constitute Panchayat level Technical Expert Committee(s) comprising of Secretary (convener), Municipal Engineer/Town Planning Officer and two experts; one each in Structural Engineering and Geotechnical Engineering (to be nominated by Government) to assess the damage, suggest protective measures and fix the compensation. The process of the Committee shall be completed in three weeks.” It is therefore clear that approval of site plan and issue of permit under Rule 10 will apply only where constructions/land developments which involve any earthwork excavation to a depth of more than 1.5 metres, if the depth of cutting is more than the horizontal distance of such cutting from the plot boundary. 11. For a construction / land development to fall under Rule 10, such construction work should not only involve earthwork excavation but also it should be to a depth of more than 1.5 metres, if the depth of cutting is more than the horizontal distance of such cutting from the plot boundary. The petitioner herein has no case that for levelling of land for his construction work, earth cutting to a depth of 1.5 metre is WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 13 : required. Therefore, in the case of the petitioner, since the proposed construction does not involve subdivision into plots of the land and since earth cutting to a depth of 1.5 metre is not required, the petitioner is not bound to obtain a Development Permit under Rule 4 nor he is expected to obtain approval of site plan under Section 10. 12. However, in many cases including in the case of the petitioner, where the land proposed for building construction is uneven and would require levelling of land, that work would necessarily involve removal of ordinary earth. When the quantum of ordinary earth so removed is large, necessarily the owner of the land may have to transport the ordinary earth to some other place. 13. Rule 26(4) of the Kerala Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015 governing the preparation and issue of mineral transit passes, reads as follows:- “26(4) Any consignment of minerals without a valid mineral transit pass shall be considered as illicit and the competent authority or authorised officer may WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 14 : recover the mineral from the person and also seize the receptacles in which the same is found and the carrier used in carrying the same. The date and time on each pass shall be entered both in words and figures by the dealer or producer at the time of despatch of the consignment.” In view of Rule 26(4), a person transporting ordinary earth without a valid mineral transit pass would be committing an offence of illicit transportation of minerals. Therefore, it becomes necessary for a person transporting ordinary earth accumulated due to building construction, to obtain mineral transit pass under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015. 14. Rule 14 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 deals with Quarrying Permit for ordinary earth. Rule 14 as amended by GO(P) No.25/2017 dated 22.06.2017 reads as follows: “ **14. Quarrying Permit for Ordinary earth** -- (1) A quarrying permit under these rules shall be obtained for extraction of ordinary earth used for filling or levelling purposes in construction of embankments, roads, railways or buildings in Form N. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule(1), no quarrying permit is required under these rules for WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 15 : extraction of ordinary earth in connection with the construction and digging of foundation for the buildings not requiring environmental clearance under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (Central Act 29 of 1986), if the owner of the land obtained a prior valid permit for construction of such building from the Local Self Government authorities concerned or if the owner of the land is entitled to construct such building as per the Kerala Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Act, 2019 (16 of 2019). [Provided that in cases where transportation of ordinary earth is required, the owner of the land shall obtain mineral transit passes for the quantity to be transported under the Kerala Minerals (Prevention of illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015 after making payment of royalty, on an application submitted in this regard. Such application shall be accompanied by (1) valid building permit for construction of building obtained from the Local Self government authorities concerned, (2) land development permit obtained from the Local Self Government authorities concerned in cases where the levelling of the land and extraction of ordinary earth is involved and (3) possession and enjoyment certificate of the land issued by the Village Officer concerned: Provided further that in cases where levelling of land and extraction of ordinary earth is involved, the building permit shall be accompanied by an approved building plan obtained from the Local Self Government authorities concerned which shall contain the area of land to be developed for the construction of the building and the quantity of ordinary earth to be extracted for such construction.] (3) A person who applies for mineral transit passes for transportation of ordinary earth under this rule shall also submit along with the application a sworn affidavit in stamped paper to the effect that he will carry out the proposed construction as per the building plan and building permit and shall complete atleast the WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 16 : construction of basement of the building within one year from the date of issuance of mineral transit passes and intimate the same to the competent authority. (4) In the event extraction of ordinary earth outside the permitted area, the permission granted for extraction and transportation shall be liable for cancellation and the offender shall be liable to pay an amount equal to five times the royalty of the ordinary earth extracted outside the area of permission as penalty. (5) In the even of failure to complete at least the construction of basement of building within one year from the date of issuance of mineral transit passes the act of extraction of ordinary earth shall be treated as illegal and the offender shall be liable to pay an amount equal to five times the royalty of the ordinary earth extracted from the area, in addition to the amount already paid.]” Rule 14(1) mandates that a Quarrying Permit should be obtained for extraction and transportation of ordinary earth used for filling or levelling purposes in construction of buildings. 15. A quarrying permit is, however, not required in view of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 14, for extraction of ordinary earth in connection with digging of foundation for the building not requiring Environmental Clearance under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, if the owner of the land obtained a prior WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 17 : valid permit for construction of such building from the Local Self Government authorities concerned. The petitioner proposes to construct a building having a plinth area of 127 Square Metres only and hence the petitioner need not obtain Environmental Clearance under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Consequently, the petitioner need not obtain a Quarrying Permit. 16. However, the first proviso to Rule 14(2) requires that in cases where transportation of ordinary earth is required, the owner of the land shall obtain Mineral Transit Passes for the quantities to be transported, under the Kerala Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015 after making payment of royalty on an application submitted. Such an application shall be accompanied by (1) valid building permit for construction of building obtained from the Local Self Government authorities concerned, (2) land development permit obtained from the Local Self Government authorities concerned in cases where the levelling of the land and extraction of ordinary earth is WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 18 : involved and (3) possession and enjoyment certificate of the land issued by the Village Officer concerned. The second proviso to Rule 14(2) requires that in cases where levelling of land and extraction of ordinary earth is involved, the Building Permit shall be accompanied by an approved Building Plan which shall contain the quantity of ordinary earth to be extracted for such construction. It may be noted that though the KPBR, 2019 does not require the petitioner to obtain a Development Permit for the purpose of the proposed construction, the first Proviso to Rule 14(2) requires the petitioner to get a Development Permit in order to obtain Mineral Transit pass to transport ordinary earth. 17. For any activity not falling under Rule 4 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019, the Local Self Government authorities are not expected or empowered to issue Development Permits. At the same time, the first proviso to Rule 14(2) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 mandates that in cases where transportation of ordinary earth is required, the owner of the land shall obtain WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 19 : mineral transit passes after making payment of royalty, on an application submitted in this regard. Such application shall be accompanied by (i) valid building permit for construction of building obtained from the Local Self Government Authorities concerned, (ii) land development permit obtained from the Local Self Government Authorities concerned in cases where the levelling of the land and extraction of ordinary earth is involved and (iii) possession and enjoyment certificate of the land. 18. The imbroglio resulting from the afore provisions in the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019 and the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 is that the Panchayat authorities would issue a Development Permit under KPBR, 2019 only when the building construction work involves subdivision of land into plots whereas the authorities under the KMMC Rules will not issue Mineral Transit Passes unless the applicant produces a Development Permit irrespective of whether sub-division into plots is contemplated or not, in the construction. WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 20 : 19. The statutory provisions are conflicting. The rule of Harmonious interpretation has to be adopted in cases where there is conflict between two or more statutes or between the two provisions of the same statute. The rule follows the principle that every statute has some purpose for which it is enacted, so it should be read as a whole. So, an interpretation which makes the enactment a consistent whole should be the aim of the courts and a construction which avoids inconsistency should be adopted. 20. In _**T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka** [(2002) 8 SCC 481]_ , interpreting Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India, the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that when the interpretation should be such as to further incorporation, they cannot be read in isolation and have to be read harmoniously to provide meaning and purpose. They cannot be interpreted in a manner that renders another provision redundant. If necessary, a purposive and harmonious interpretation should be given. WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 21 : 21. The Supreme Court laid down the following rules of harmonious construction in the case of _**CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers** [(2002) 7 SCC 705]_ :- The courts must avoid a head on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions and they must construe the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them. The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained in another unless the court, despite all its efforts, is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences. When it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions, the courts must interpret them in such a way so that effect is given to both the provisions as much as possible. Courts must also keep in mind that interpretation that reduces one provision to a useless number or dead is not harmonious construction. 22. In the case in _**Shyam Kishori Devi v. The Patna Municipal Corporation** [AIR 1966 SC 1678]_ , the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the Court must construe a section unless it is impossible to do so to make it workable rather than make WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 22 : it unworkable. In _**Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain** [(1997) 1 SCC 373],_ the Apex Court held that when there are two conflicting provisions which cannot be reconciled with each other, they should be interpreted with if possible, to give effect to both and that is the essence of the rule of harmonious construction. The Courts have also to keep in mind that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a "dead letter" or "useless lumber" is not harmonious construction. To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose. 23. The conflicting provisions in the KMBR, 2019 and the KMMC Rules, 2015 have to be interpreted keeping in mind the said principle. The KMBR, 2019 are Rules made for the specific purpose of regulating building constructions in the State. The KMMC Rules are framed invoking Section 15(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. The said Act, 1957 is enacted to provide for the development and regulation of mines and minerals under the control of the Union. The 1[st] Proviso to Rule 14(2) requires WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 23 : that where transportation of ordinary earth is required, the owner shall make an application for mineral transit passes which should be accompanied by Building Permit and Land Development Permit obtained from the Local Self Government Institution. 24. The KMBR, 2019 do not provide for issuance of Land Development Permit in cases where the building construction does not involve subdivision of plots. Therefore, the 1[st] proviso should be understood to mean that the application for mineral transit passes should be “ _accompanied by (1) valid building permit for construction of building obtained from the Local Self Government authorities concerned_ _**or/and** (2) Land Development Permit obtained from the Local Self Government authorities concerned in cases where the levelling of the land and extraction of ordinary earth is involved,_ _**as the case may be**_ ”. When the proviso is so construed, in cases where there is no development of land as contemplated by Rule 4 of the KPBR, 2019, for obtaining Mineral Transit pass the owner of the land WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 24 : need to produce only Building Permit and Possession and Enjoyment Certificate of the land issued by the Village Officer. 25. The 2[nd] Proviso to Rule 14(2) provides for safeguard to avert any possible misuse of Mineral Transit Passes for commercial exploitation of minor minerals, under the guise of building construction. The 2[nd] Proviso mandates that in cases where levelling of land and extraction of ordinary earth is involved, the Building Permit should be accompanied by an approved building plan which shall contain the quantity of ordinary earth to be extracted for such construction. Even in the cases where a Land Development Permit is not warranted for extraction and transportation of ordinary soil, an approved Building Plan containing the quantity of ordinary earth to be extracted for such construction, is necessary. 26. In view of the findings made as afore, the following conclusions are arrived at: (1) Where a building construction which does not involve development of land by subdivision of land into plots, but involves extraction and transportation of ordinary earth, WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 25 : the owner/applicant need not obtain a Land Development Permit from Local Self Government Institution for the purpose of obtaining Mineral Transit Pass under the KMMC Rules, 2015. (2) However, in such cases, the application for Mineral Transit Pass should be accompanied by a valid Building Permit obtained from the Local Self Government authorities, a Possession Certificate issued by the Village Officer and an approved building plan obtained from the Local Self Government authorities which shall contain the quantity of ordinary earth to be extracted for such construction. In the light of the afore findings and conclusions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1[st] respondent that if the petitioner submits application for issuance of Mineral Transit passes, the said application should be considered in the light of the observations and findings made hereinabove and the passes should be issued to the petitioner, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible. If the construction of the petitioner involves excavation of earth to a depth of more than WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 26 : 1.5 metres, if the depth of cutting is more than the horizontal distance of such cutting from the plot boundary, the petitioner shall obtain approval of site plan and permit for excavation as provided under Rule 10 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2019. Sd/- **N. NAGARESH, JUDGE** aks/25.08.2021 WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 27 : ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10036/2021** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO. 1486/20 DATED 03.12.2020 OF PAPMABY SUB REGISTRY.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 20.01.2021 FOR RS. 118 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER, MEENADAM ACCEPTING THE LAND TAX OF PROPERTY INHERITED AS PER EXHIBIT P1 SETTLEMENT DEED.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE NO. 54124618 DATED 29.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER, MEENADAM ON THE PROPERTY INHERITED AS PER EXHIBIT P1 SETTLEMENT DEED.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH NO. 91/2021 DATED 01.02.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER, MEENADAM ON THE PROPERTY INHERITED AS PER EXHIBIT P1 SETTLEMENT DEED.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT NO. A4B1(44265)/2021 ON 17.02.2021 FROM THE MEENADAM PANCHAYAT.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 03.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS SON AND HIS WIFE TO THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE RECEIPT DATED 03.03.2021 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH THE NEAR BY AKSHAYA CENTRE.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. TCPCTP/2164/2020-E3 DATED 22.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. TCPCTP/2357/2020-DE DATED 30.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** WP(C) No.10036/2021 : 28 : **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. RA/175/2021-LSGD DATED 11.02.2021 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09.04.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS SON AND HIS WIFE BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 13.04.2021 OF EXT.P11. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER ON 13.04.2021. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.08.2012 IN WP(C) NO. 7085 OF 2007 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.**