Silver Star Arts And Sport Club vs District Geologist, Thrissur District

Devan Ramachandran, J

The petitioner, which is stated to be a Club, has approached this Court virtually in public interest, alleging that the 12th respondent is carrying on quarrying activities in Kuttichira and Kodassery Villages, without proper licence or permits and that the documents relied upon by him for obtaining his earlier licences are forged. They say that they have, therefore, preferred several complaints before the competent Authorities, including the District Collector and point out to Exts.P2 to P11 in substantiation. The petitioner says that in spite of this, no action has been taken by the competent Authorities, thus constraining them to approach this Court through this writ petition.

Sri.S.Krishna Prasad, learned counsel appearing for respondents 11 and 12, submitted that the allegations in this writ petition are completely without basis and wholly incorrect because his clients are operating only on the basis of valid and legally obtained licences and permits. He submitted that it is true that one of the licences have now expired and therefore, that no quarrying activity is being carried on by his clients in the Kuttichira Village; whereas, the quarrying in the Kodassery Village is being run in strict compliance of all statutory prescriptions. He, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

Smt.Amminikutty, learned Senior Government Pleader, submitted that a memo dated 26.08.2019 has been filed by the earlier learned Senior Government Pleader, producing a report of the District Collector, wherein, it has been averred that the lands in question must be assumed to be assigned for agricultural purposes and that there is no quarrying activities now carried on by the party respondents in the Kuttichira Village, since the permit has now expired. She pointed out that the District Collector has also averred that, as on the date of the report - which was on 11.10.2019 - quarrying activities in the Kodassery Village was being done by the aforementioned respondents and that the same appears to be in force.

When I hear the learned Senior Government Pleader as afore, it is without doubt that this writ petition has been pending for the last more than four years. There is no materials available on record as to the status of the quarrying activities or as to the consequences it is causing to the nature as of now. Even if the party respondents are operating on a valid licence, a specific duty is cast upon the District Collector, in his role as the Chairman of the District Disaster Management Committee, to ensure that no such activity would cause damage to the nature or to the residents of the area. This is an obligation that he has to exercise on a continual basis, particularly because, as we have all seen these days, the climate and whether conditions of Kerala are rapidly evolving and changing.

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition to the limited extent of directing the second respondent - District Collector, to take a decision on the various complaints made in this writ petition, after affording necessary opportunity of being heard to both sides and after examining all documents and materials to be produced by them before him; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

I make it clear that I have not decided or concluded upon any of the rival contentions affirmatively and that all of them are left open to be decided by the District Collector appropriately, when the afore exercise is completed.

I, however, make it further clear that if the District Collector is to find any merit in the cause projected by the petitioner, as regards the quarrying now being operated by the party respondents, then necessary swift action as per law will be taken without reservation, thereafter.