AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 399 wordsT.R. Ravi, J
The writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P6 order whereby the 2nd respondent has rejected an application for D&O licence submitted by the petitioner for carrying out quarrying operations. The reason stated in Ext.P6 is that the area where quarrying is sought to be conducted had been affected during the floods in 2019 and that there are objections from the owners of neighbouring properties. It is also stated that the 2nd respondent had personally enquired into the issue. The contention of the petitioner is that the order Ext.P6 is legally unsustainable in view of the judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in Tomy Thomas v. State of Kerala reported in [2019 (3) KLT 987], Abdulla M.P. & Ors. v. Trippangottur Grama Panchayat & Ors. reported in [2021 (4) KHC 550] and Malayoram Rock Products Pvt.Ltd. (M/s.) v. Vanimel Grama Panchayat & Anr. reported in [2021 (4) KHC 398] and other cases.
The respondents have filed a counter affidavit contending that the petitioner has an alternate remedy. The respondents have also produced complaints submitted against the establishment of the quarry.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.
The issue involved in the writ petition is no longer res integra. In Tomy Thomas (supra), a Full Bench of this Court has categorically held that after the amendment of Section 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 by Act 14 of 2018, the power of the Village Panchayat to refuse permission has been taken away by the Legislature. This Court has held that once the applicant complies with all the requirements and produces all the necessary permits/licenses which are required to be produced, the Panchayat cannot refuse a D&O licence. The Court also held that there can be no refusal for the reason of high density of population in the neighbourhood or the likelihood to cause pollution or nuisance. In Abdulla M.P. (supra) and Malayoram (supra), a learned Single Judge has followed the Full Bench decision in Tomy Thomas (supra) and directed issuance of D&O licence. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in this writ petition.
The writ petition is allowed. Ext.P6 order is set aside. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the application submitted by the petitioner for D&O licence and grant the same, if he is otherwise entitled to, before 31.03.2022.