W.P.(C).Nos.8813/2016, 8729/2016, 13096/2016 & 6661/2018

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR** **FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018/25TH KARTHIKA, 1940** ## **W.P(C).No.8813 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONER:** **ROY T.T. AGED 39 YEARS** **S/O.THOMAS, RESIDING AT THANDUM PURATH HOUSE, OORAMANA P.O., RAMAMANGALAM-686 663, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS.SMT.MARY BENJEMIN SMT.K.GEETHA (PONKUNNAM)** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, RAMAMANGALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 663.** - **2 DIRECTOR OF MINING & GEOLOGY OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MINING & GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, ERNAKULAM-682 030.** - **3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMURI, PAMPAKKUDA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 667.** - **4 K.S.PAULOSE MANAGING PARTNER, MATHA GRANITES, OORAMANA P.O., RAMAMANGALAM 686 663, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.** - **5 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE(ERNAKULAM-II), PERUMBAVOOR-683 542.** - **ADDL. 6 P.VARGHESE, RESPONDENTS 6 & 7 PULLIATTU HOUSE, OORAMANA (POST), RAMAMANGALAM (VIA) MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, PIN – 686 663.** - **7 THE TALUK SURVEYOR, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018 : 2 :** **ADDL. R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO.5344/2016 DATED 23.5.2016. ADDL. R7 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.10.2016.** **R1 BY ADV.SRI.JIBU P THOMAS R1 BY ADV. SRI. K.RAJESH KANNAN R2, R3 & ADDL.R7 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE R4 BY ADV. SRI.SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY R4 BY ADV.SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH R5 BY SRI. T. NAVEEN, SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ADDL. R6 BY ADVS.SRI.C.VATHSALAN SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN SMT.THUSHARA.V** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.11.2018, ALONG WITH W.P(C).NO.8729/2016, W.P(C).NO.13096/2016 AND W.P(C).NO.6661/2018, THE COURT ON 16.11.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 3 :** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR** **FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018/25TH KARTHIKA, 1940** ## **WP(C).No.13096 of 2016** ## **PETITIONER:** **P.VARGHEESE AGED 71 YEARS** **PULLIATTU HOUSE, OORAMANA (POST), RAMAMANGALAM (VIA), MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, PIN-686663** **BY ADVS.SRI.C.VATHSALAN SMT.THUSHARA.V SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH P.O.RAMAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 686663, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **2 DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MINING & GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030** - **3 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE(ERNAKULAM - II), PERUMBAVOOR, PIN 683542** - **4 VILLAGE OFFICER OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PAMPAKKUDA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 686667** - **5 MATHA GRANITES OORAMANA (POST), RAMAMANGALAM, PIN- 686663, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.S.POULOSE.** - **ADDL. 6TH 6 THE TALUK SURVEYOR RESPONDENT MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 4 :** **ADDL. 6TH RESPONDENT IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.10.2016.** **R1 BY ADV.SRI.JIBU P THOMAS R1 BY ADV.SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN** **R2, R4 & ADDL.R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE R5 BY ADV.SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY R5 BY ADV.SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH** **R3 BY SRI. T.NAVEEN SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD** **ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER SMT. MARY BEENA JOSEPH** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.11.2018, ALONG WITH W.P(C).NO.8813/2016, W.P(C)NO.8729/2016 AND W.P(C).NO.6661/2018, THE COURT ON 16.11.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 5 :** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR** **FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018/25TH KARTHIKA, 1940** ## **WP(C).No.6661 OF 2018** ## **PETITIONER:** **RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE,RAMAMANGALAM P.O. MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN 686 663** **BY ADVS.SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, KAKKANADU P.O. ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 030** - **2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661** - **3 THE TAHASILDAR TALUK OFFICE,MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN- 686 661** - **4 THE TALUK SURVEYOR TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661** - **5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER VILLAGE OFFICE, RAMAMANGALAM, PIN-686 663** - **6 M/S.MATHA GRANITES OORAMANA P.O. RAMAMANGALAM,** **REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER K.S.PAULOSE, AGED 48, S/O.SCARIA, PIN-686 730** **R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SURIN GOERGE IPE R6 BY ADV. SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY** **R6 BY ADV.SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.11.2018, ALONG WITH W.P(C).NO.8729/2016, W.P(C).NO.8813/2016 & W.P(C).NO.13096/2016,, THE COURT ON 16.11.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 6 :** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR** **FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018/25TH KARTHIKA, 1940** **WP(C).No.8729 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONER:** **K.S.POULOSE AGED 33 YEARS** **MANAGING PARTNER, MATHA GRANITES, OORAMANA P.O, RAMAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS.SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** - **2 THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYAT, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, MUSEUM (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.** - **3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682030.** - **4 THE SECRETARY RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, RAMAMANGALAM (PO), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 663.** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018 : 7 :** > **ADDL.5TH & 5 P.VARGHEESE** > **6TH PULLIATTU HOUSE, OORAMANA [POST], RESPONDENTS RAMAMANGALAM [VIA], MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, PIN-686663. 6 THE TALUK SURVEYOR MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDL. 5TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23.5.2016 IN I.A.NO.5249/2016. ADDL.6TH RESPONDENT IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.10.2016.** **R1, R2, R3 & ADDL.6TH RESPONDENT BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER SMT.RAJANI.C.S. R4 BY ADV.SRI.JIBU P THOMAS R4 BY ADV.SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN ADDL.R5 BY ADV.SMT.THUSHARA.V ADDL.R5 BY ADV.SRI.C.VATHSALAN ADDL.R5 BY ADV.SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN ADDL.R5 BY ADV. SRI.GHOSH YOHANNAN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.11.2018 ALONG WITH W.P(C)NO.8813/2016, W.P(C).NO.13096/2016 AND W.P(C).NO.6661/2018, THE COURT ON 16.11.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 8 :** ## **J U D G M E N T** In all these writ petitions, save W.P.(C).No.8729/2016, the petitioners challenge the legality of the business of a Partnership Firm, under the name and style of “Matha Granites” (which name is used in this judgment to refer to the firm and/or its partners), in conducting a quarry and a crusher unit in approximately 22 acres of land falling in Sy.Nos.878/1, 878/2, 879/2 and 881/1 of Memury Village coming under the territorial limits of Ramamangalam Grama Panchayat. While the activities carried on by the said Firm are alleged to be in violation of the statutory Rules governing quarrying and crushing activities, it is also the case of the writ petitioners that the said Firm, in the course of carrying on quarrying operations, has damaged and destroyed a Panchayat road known as “Parambarakkadu – Manjappallykadu road” or “Kodukuthymala – Manjappallykadu road”. For the sake of convenience, the brief reference to facts and exhibits is from W.P. (C).No.8813/2016. 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.8813/2016 is stated to be an artist by profession and the President of the Parambarakkad Paura Samathy, whose members belong to the Scheduled Caste community, and are stated to be living in a Harijan settlement colony in Parambarakkad - Kodukuthymala. It is his case that the Kodukuthymala – Manjappallykadu road, which is also known as the “Parambarakkadu – Manjappallykadu road” was constructed some time **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 9 :** in 1972, consequent to land owners surrendering their lands to the Panchayat for the same. It is stated that the road was constructed, and thereafter handed over to the Ramamangalam Panchayat, which subsequently maintained the road. In 1993, the 4[th] respondent firm – Matha Granites started a quarrying unit on the western and northern side of the road, and a crusher unit and its office on the eastern side of the said road. It is alleged that, in the course of the quarrying activities carried on by the said Firm, they demolished the existing panchayat road that was passing through their property, and thereafter they constructed another road on the eastern boundary of their property for use by the petitioner and others. While the petitioner objected to the change in alignment of the road by the 4[th] respondent, it is also stated that the 4[th] respondent obtained a location sketch from the Village Officer for obtaining an Environmental Clearance Certificate. Thereupon, alleging that there was an erroneous noting of a private road as a 'panchayat road' in the said sketch provided by the Village Officer, the 4[th] respondent approached this Court through W.P.(C).No.10296/2015, seeking a direction to the Village Officer to consider their representation for correcting the sketch so as to avoid any reference to a panchayat road passing through their property. This Court, while considering the said writ petition, took note of the submission of the learned Standing counsel for the Ramamangalam Grama Panchayat, that the Panchayat was not claiming any right over the said road, and further, that the road in question was **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 10 :** not included in the road register of the Panchayat, and allowed the writ petition, by quashing the sketch issued by the Village Officer, and directing the Village Officer to pass orders on the representation preferred by Matha Granites, after obtaining reports from the Panchayat with regard to ownership of the private road constructed through the middle of the Firm's property. 3. In an appeal preferred by one Santhosh K.G., a resident of the locality, against the judgment in W.P.(C).No.10296/2015, a Division Bench of this Court chose not to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, save to the extent of affording the appellant an opportunity to submit a representation before the Village Officer, together with any material to support his case, and directing the Village Officer to decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation of the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 15.7.2015. The judgment of the Division Bench is produced as Ext.P6 in the writ petition. 4. Acting on the directions of the Division Bench, the Village Officer proceeded to pass an order dated 21.10.2015 [Ext.P8] finding that there was no road called “Manjappallykadu - Parambarakkadu road” passing through the property of the 4[th] respondent, mentioned in the Village records or survey plans. Such a road was also not seen on a site inspection conducted by the Village Officer. Sri.Santhosh K.G. was therefore informed that his representation could not be considered **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 11 :** favourably. The order dated 21.10.2015 of the Village Officer is sought to be impugned by the petitioner herein, a stranger to the previous round of litigation, relying on the sketch earlier prepared by the Village Officer, which was issued to Matha Granites, in connection with its quarrying activities. The petitioner also relies on the decision of the Panchayat dated 3.10.2015, stating that the road passing through the property of Matha Granites belongs to the Panchayat, as also the road register of the Panchayat [Ext.P13] that indicates that the road in question is included in the road register of the Panchayat. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the Manjappallykadu - Perumparakkadu road is a public road, and is vested with the Ramamangalam Panchayat, as also a direction to the Panchayat, Geologist and the Kerala State Pollution Control Board to cancel the licenses/permissions issued to Matha Granites for violating the conditions of the quarrying lease. 5. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.13096/2016 is a neighbouring land owner to the property owned by Matha Granites, and he is aggrieved by the action of the said Unit in allegedly damaging/destroying the Kodukuthymala – Manjappallykadu road passing through its property. The said petitioner also alleges that Matha Granites is carrying on quarrying activities in violation of the statutory conditions. In this writ petition, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed vide order dated 6.4.2016 of this Court, to ascertain the distance of the quarry from the **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018 : 12 :** petitioner's property, and also to ascertain the existence of a public road passing through the property of Matha Granites. The report of the Advocate Commissioner indicates that the distance from the petitioner's property to the quarry is 46 m., and that there is a public road that is demolished in certain areas, and that the distance of the quarry from the said road is less than 10 m. Through an objection filed to the said report of the Advocate Commissioner, Matha Granites contends that the distance from the petitioner's property to the crusher unit is more than 50 m.; that Matha Granites has a quarrying lease that is valid till 15.10.2021, and that the public road is more than 150 m. from the property belonging to Matha Granites, and the road referred to by the Advocate Commissioner is not a public road but a private road belonging to Matha Granites. Through a counter affidavit filed in the writ petition, M/s.Matha Granites would deny that there is a public road called “Parambrakkadu – Manjappallykadu road”, and contend that, at any rate, there is no material to suggest that there was a surrender of land to the Panchayat for the purposes of construction of the said road. It is pointed out that the quarry and crusher unit in Sy.Nos.878/2 and 879/2 of Memury Village required a road to be cut through the property belonging to Matha Granites, so that vehicles could reach the crusher and the quarry. The quarry and crusher operations are stated to have commenced in 1993, and it is their stand that people used to walk through the property for getting to the other side, and pursuant to a request from the Panchayat, they had constructed a road - **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 13 :** Manjappallykadu – Parambrakkadu road of approximately 1500 m. length on the eastern side of their property so as to provide a passage to persons who were using their property to get to the other side. As regards the quarrying activities, it is stated that the quarrying lease was obtained on 11.6.2009, and is valid till 15.10.2021. The fact that the quarrying lease was obtained prior to 2012, is highlighted to indicate that there was no requirement of obtaining an Environmental Clearance Certificate till the lease came up for renewal in 2021. 6. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Geologist, it is stated that the functioning of the quarrying and crusher Unit of Matha Granites is legal in all respects, as all statutory registrations and consents have been obtained. It is pointed out that on one occasion, when Matha Granites had encroached the lease boundary, a penalty was realised from them. 7. It is relevant to note that, by an interim order dated 18.10.2016, this Court had directed the Taluk Surveyor, Muvattupuzha, to conduct a survey of the property and report on whether quarrying operations were being carried out in accordance with the mining plan obtained by Matha Granites. The Taluk Surveyor was also directed to examine whether there was any road available as per the survey records, revenue records or asset register of the Panchayat, and if so, whether the road in question was a private road or public road. In a **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018 : 14 :** report that was filed by the Taluk Surveyor, pursuant to the order dated 18.10.2016, it was indicated that the survey records and revenue records do not show the existence of such a road, and further, that the road shown as “Parambrakkadu – Manjappallykadu road” in the asset register of the Panchayat could not actually be plotted on the land belonging to Matha Granites. The road passing through the property of Matha Granites was found to be one that was claimed as a 'private road' by Matha Granites. 8. W.P.(C).No.6661/2018 is one filed by the Ramamangalam Grama Panchayat, challenging the order dated 21.10.2015 of the Village Officer that is impugned in W.P.(C).No.8813/2016. It is relevant to note that this writ petition was filed by the Panchayat, when confronted with a query from the Bench, during the hearing of the other writ petitions, as to whether they had challenged the order of the Village Officer that indicated that there was no road called “Manjappallykadu – Parambrakkadu road” that had vested with the Ramamangalam Grama Panchayat. In the writ petition filed by the Panchayat, apart from challenging the Village Officer's order, the Panchayat also seeks a declaration that the Manjappallykadu – Parambrakkadu road is a 'public road' that vests with the Panchayat. 9. I have heard Smt. Mary Benjamin, Sri. Vathsalan and Sri. Jibu P. Thomas for the petitioners in W.P.(C).Nos.8813/2016, W.P. **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 15 :** (C).No.13096/2016 and W.P.(C).No.6661/2018. I have also heard Adv.Sri.Jobi Jose Kondody, the learned counsel appearing for M/s.Matha Granites as also Sri.G.S.Reghunath, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner partner of M/s.Matha Granites in W.P.(C).No.8729/2016. 10. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I find that the main issue that arises for consideration in these cases is whether there was in existence a Panchayat road by the name “Kodukuthymala – Manjappallykadu road” [also known as “Parambarakkadu – Manjappallykadu road”] that passed through the property of Matha Granites, and which road was destroyed by the said Matha Granites, during the course of carrying on its quarrying operations on the land. It is relevant to note, in this connection, that, in the litigation that stemmed from W.P.(C).No.10296/2015 filed by Matha Granites, where they sought a direction to the Village Officer to consider their representation for correcting the sketch issued to them that showed the passage of a public road through their property, this Court, in its judgment dated 15.7.2015, found that the case of the Ramamangalam Grama Panchayat was that it did not claim any right over the said road, and further that the said road was not included in the road register of the Panchayat. It was taking note of the said stand of the Panchayat, that the writ petition itself was disposed, directing the Village Officer to consider the representation of Matha Granites, for the issuance of a **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 16 :** fresh sketch of the property. Although a Writ Appeal was preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, by a third party - Sri.Santhosh K.G., the Division bench only directed the Village Officer to consider the objections of the said Santhosh also while passing orders based on the directions of the learned Single Judge. In the proceedings that ensued, the Village officer clearly found that there was no public road that vested in the Panchayat, which passed through the property of Matha Granites. The existence of such a road was not seen recorded in any Village record or survey plan either. Under these circumstances, it would be futile for the petitioners herein to contend that such a road does exist, and that too vests in the Panchayat. No doubt, the petitioners have sought to rely on a subsequent decision of the Panchayat dated 3.10.2015, which indicates that the road passing through the property of Matha Granites belongs to the Panchayat, as also the road register of the Panchayat that is now produced to show that the said road is included in the register. I have perused the original road register maintained by the Panchayat, both the manuscript form as also the printout of the digital form. While the extract of the printout in digital format indicates that there is a road referred to as the “Parambarakkadu – Manjappallykadu road” of 1 km. length and 5 m. width, in respect of which, an amount of Rs.7,92,838/- was spent by the Panchayat towards costs of construction from 1995, the corresponding entry in the manuscript version indicates that the details of the said road were entered in the road register only in the year 1994-95. If, as is **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 17 :** the case of the petitioners herein, the Panchayat road was in existence since 1972, then, one is at a loss to understand how the road could not be mentioned in the road register maintained by the Panchayat till the year 1994-95. This is all the more so because, the very same register indicates that there were other roads that were entered in the register during the immediately preceding year 1993-94. In the light of the judgments in the earlier round of litigation, and the order of the Village Officer passed pursuant to the directions in the said judgment, this Court finds it difficult to place reliance on the unsubstantiated entries in the road register maintained by the Panchayat, for the purposes of finding that there existed a Panchayat road that passed through the property of Matha Granites. The declaratory reliefs sought for by the petitioners in these writ petitions, to declare that the Parambarakkadu – Manjappallykadu road is a public road that was vested with the Ramamangalam Panchayat, cannot therefore be granted, and the prayer for the same is consequently rejected. 11. On the other issue as to whether the quarrying and crushing activities of Matha Granites needs to be interdicted in view of any violation of statutory conditions governing quarrying and crushing activities, I find that the stand of the Geologist, as evident from the counter affidavit filed by him, is that the quarry and crusher units are functioning with all statutory registrations and consents, and is therefore legal, in all respects. It is also seen that the quarrying lease **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 18 :** granted to Matha Granites is dated 11.6.2009, and is valid till 15.10.2021. Going by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in **All Kerala River Protection Council v. State of Kerala - [2015 (2) KLT 78]** as also in **Nature Lovers' Forum v. State of Kerala - [2016 (1) KLT 75]** that held that quarrying lease holders, who were granted quarrying lease prior to 18.5.2012, are required to obtain Environmental Clearance Certificate only at the time of renewal of existing quarrying leases, I am of the view that the quarrying and crushing activities of Matha Granites does not require to be interdicted by this Court in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Resultantly, W.P.(C).No.8813/2016, W.P.(C).No.13096/2016 and W.P.(C).No.6661/2018 are dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners therein to establish their right of access, if any, into the property of Matha Granites, before a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. 12. W.P.(C).No.8729/2016 is one that has been filed by a partner of Matha Granites seeking a renewal of the Dangerous & Offensive Trade licence [D & O licence] for carrying on the quarrying and crushing operations. It is seen that, when an application was preferred for renewal of the D & O licence, the Panchayat had insisted on the petitioner producing an Environmental Clearance Certificate as a condition for renewing the licence. While, through an interim order dated 23.3.2016, the Panchayat was directed to provisionally renew the **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018 : 19 :** D & O licence, inasmuch as the period for which the renewal was sought, has since expired during the pendency of the writ petition, the Writ Petition itself is now closed as infructuous. Resultantly, while W.P.(C).No.8813/2016, W.P.(C).No.13096/2016 and W.P.(C).No.6661/2018 are dismissed, with liberty to the petitioners therein to approach a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for declaratory reliefs, if so advised, W.P.(C).No.8729/2016 is dismissed as infructuous. **Sd/A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE** **prp/** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 20 :** ## **APPENDIX OF W.P(C).NO.8813/2016** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT DATED 8/2/2016 APPEARED IN MANORAMA DAILY EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER DATED 30/9/2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA. EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PROTEST MADE BY THE MEMBERS OF THE SAMATHY EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH DATED 24/3/2015 PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15/7/2015 IN W.P(C)NO.10296/2015. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18/9/2015 IN W.A.NO.1984/2015. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/9/2015. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 21/10/2015 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2009. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 2/5/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE DECISION DATED 3/10/2015 ENTERED IN THE RECORDS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF ROAD REGISTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT P14 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE AND LIE OF THE MANJAPPILLY KADU - KODUKUTHY MALA ROAD BEFORE ITS DESTRUCTION.** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 21 :** **EXHIBIT P15 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE AND LIE OF THE MANJAPPILLY KADU - KODUKUTHY MALA ROAD AFTER ITS DESTRUCTION EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR WELFARE OF SCHEDULED CASTES & BACKWARD CLASSES. EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF A 8 YEARS OLD GIRL NAMED DEVIKA SHAJU BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR WELFARE OF SCHEDULED CASTS AND BACKWARD CLASSES. EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DOCTOR TO GOPIKA SHAJU. EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATED 29/12/2015 CONDUCTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 5/12/2015 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTO OF THE STONE LAID IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEME OF PAMBRAKAD – MANJAPPALLYKKAD ROAD. EXHIBIT P23 COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1419 OF 1993 OF PRIVATOM SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, DATED 16.7.1993. EXHIBIT P24 COPY OF THE WILL NO.1245 OF 1986 OF MUVATTUPUZHA REGISTRAR OFFICE, 8.5.1986. EXHIBIT P25 COPY OF THE GOOGLE MAP, DATED 24.1.2011. EXHIBIT P26 COPY OF EXHIBIT-P25 PLOTTED IN TUNE WITH EXHIBIT P4. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.l(14) DATED 25.7.2014 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT AND DECISION DATED 3.10.2015 OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE. EXHIBIT R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 9.11.2015** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 22 :** **ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT R1(D)** **TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.9.2015 SENT BY VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMMURY TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH.** **EXHIBIT R1(E) TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 9.9.2015 SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMMURY.** **EXHIBIT R1(F) TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 16.10.2015 SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMMURY.** **EXHIBIT R4(A) TRUE COPY OF SKETCH OF THE PROPERTIES OF THIS RESPONDENT IN SURVEY NOS.878/1, 878/2, 879/2 AND 881/1 OF MEMURY VILLAGE PREPARED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER ON 1.6.2009 FOR GETTING MINING LEASE FROM GOVERNMENT PRODUCED AS EXHIBIT-R5(D) IN W.P.(C).NO.13096/2016.** **EXHIBIT R4(B) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2645/1993 DATED 29.12.1993. EXHIBIT R4(C) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1437/1994 DATED 7.6.1994. EXHIBIT R4(D) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.826/97 DATED 15.3.1997. EXHIBIT R4(E) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.198/2001 DATED 30.1.2001. EXHIBIT R4(F) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1621/2004 DATED 15.7.2004. EXHIBIT R4(G) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.798/2006 DATED 30.3.2001. EXHIBIT R4(H) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2178/2012 DATED 24.9.2012. EXHIBIT R4(I) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2179/2012 DATED 24.9.2012. EXHIBIT R4(J) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2176/2012 DATED 24.9.2012.** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 23 :** |**EXHIBIT R4(K)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2177/2012 DATED**| |---|---| ||**24.9.2012.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(L)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2096/2013 DATED**| ||**20.9.2013.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(M)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2723/2013 DATED**| ||**5.12.2013.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(N)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.291/2013 DATED**| ||**5.2.2013.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(O)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.761/2013 DATED**| ||**27.3.2013.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(P)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2723/2013 DATED**| ||**5.12.2013.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(Q)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1232/2014 DATED**| ||**17.5.2014.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(R)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.1179/2015 DATED**| ||**17.6.2015.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(S)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.741 OF 2001 DATED**| ||**18.4.2001.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(T)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.994/2005 DATED**| ||**30.3.2005.**| |**EXHIBIT R4(U)**|**TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2795/2003 DATED**| ||**24.12.2003.**| ||**//TRUE COPY//**| **P.S. TO JUDGE** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 24 :** ## **APPENDIX OF W.P(C).NO.13096/2016** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE RELATING TO THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH OTHER CO-OWNERS. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF LOCATION SKETCH ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT TO 5TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM IST RESPONDENT DATED 27/1/2016. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5/12/2015. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PUBLISHED IN GO(RT)NO.1222/2010 ID DTD 21/8/2010. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD 7.12.2015 BY THE PETITIONER TO CHIEF ENGINEER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT WITH NO.1419/93 DATED 16.7.1993 OF S.R.O. PIRAVOM EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY 5TH RESPONDENT DRAWN BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 1.6.2009 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R1(A) TRUE COY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.1(14) DATED 25.7.2014 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 3.10.2015 OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. EXHIBIT R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 9.11.2015 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R1(D) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.9.2015 SENT BY VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMMURY TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. EXHIBIT R1(E) TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 9.9.2015 SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMMURY. EXHIBIT R1(F) TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 16.10.2015 SENT** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 25 :** **BY 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEMMURY.** **EXHIBIT R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING NO.1(14) OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 25.7.2014. EXHIBIT R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE FIFTH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R5(C) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.7.2015 IN W.P. (C).NO.10296 OF 2015 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXHIBIT R5(D) TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 11.6.2009 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND THE FIFTH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT C1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEETING OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 3.10.2016. EXHIBIT C2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ASSET REGISTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT C3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT C4 PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN FROM THE SPOT. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 26 :** ## **APPENDIX OF W.P(C).NO.6661/2018** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF DOCUMENT NUMBER 994/2005 OF PIRAVOM SUB REGISTRY EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE PHOTOCOPY DOCUMENT NUMBER 1419/1993 OF PIRAVOM SUB REGISTRY EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE E ENTRY IN THE ASSET REGISTER OF THE RAMAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH DATED 24-03-15 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SURRENDER FORM SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 15-05-2014 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15-07-15 IN WP(C).10296/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18-09-15 IN W.A.1984/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT DATED 21-10-2015 PREPARED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLICATION PREPARED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE PETITIONER FOR PRODUCING IT IN W.P.(C).NO.10296 OF 2016 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT, WITHOUT DATE. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE** **W.P.(C).Nos.8813, 8729, 13096 OF 2016 & 6661/2018** **: 27 :** ## **APPENDIX OF W.P(C).NO.8729/2016** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE GRANTED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 11-6-2009 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE D & O LICENSE ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 6-5-2015 VALID UPTO 31-3-2016.** **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF D & O LICENSE OF THE QUARRY OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 19-2-2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT** **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 3-3-2016 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 1.4.2017.** **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.** **//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE**