Kerala High Court
Aboobacker Siddique vs The Land Revenue Commissioner on 10 August, 2022
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 25438 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
ABOOBACKER SIDDIQUE
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMED, OLD ROAD FIREWORKS ARIKKADI,
KUMBLA, KASARAGOD-671 121
BY ADV K.MOHANAKANNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
COMMISSIONERATE OF LAND REVENUE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD- 671123
3 DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CIVIL STATION,
VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD- 671123
4 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
PARAKATTA, VIDYANAGAR,
ULIYATHADKA ROAD, KUDLU, KASARAGOD-671 123
5 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
GHS ROAD, KUMBLA KASARAGOD- 671321
SRI.SYAMANTHAK B.S-GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 25438 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 10th day of August, 2022 The petitioner, who is holder of an Explosives Licence for manufacture of fireworks from 2017 onwards, is before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P3 and to direct the 1st respondent-Land Revenue Commissioner to consider Ext.P7 statutory appeal filed against Ext.P6 order of the 3rd respondent-District Magistrate.
2. The petitioner states that a crime was registered against him alleging offences punishable under Section 286 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 9B(i)(b) of the Explosives Act, 1984. Even going by the provisions of Rules 112 and 118 of the Explosives Rules, 2008, suspension of Explosives Licence cannot be effected on the ground that a criminal case is pending.
3. However, by Ext.P3, the Licence of the petitioner was suspended for the reason that police has reported a WP(C) NO. 25438 OF 2022 3 crime, which is registered and pending. Ext.P3 is illegal and is in violation of Rule 118 of the Explosives Rules, 2008, contends the petitioner.
4. The petitioner states that he approached this Court filing WP(C) No.18581/2022 and this Court, by Ext.P4 judgment, directed the District Magistrate to consider Ext.P3, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Pursuant to Ext.P4, though the petitioner was heard in the matter, the District Magistrate has passed Ext.P6 order, without adverting to the legal arguments made by the petitioner. In the circumstances, Ext.P6 is absolutely arbitrary and illegal, contends the petitioner.
5. The petitioner therefore has filed Ext.P7 appeal invoking Rule 121 of the Explosives Rules, 2008, against the order of the Magistrate. Ext.P7 appeal has been preferred before the Land Revenue Commissioner on 19.07.2022 along with a stay petition. Unless the 1 st respondent-Land Revenue Commissioner considers Ext.P7 appeal and the stay petition WP(C) NO. 25438 OF 2022 4 forthwith, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship.
6. Counsel for the petitioner urged for a direction that till the appeal petition and stay petition are considered by the Land Revenue Commissioner, implementation of the impugned order be kept in abeyance.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
8. Against Ext.P6 order of the District Magistrate, the petitioner has filed Ext.P7 appeal accompanied by stay petition. The petitioner has filed Ext.P7 appeal invoking Rule 121 of the Explosives Rules, 2008. As Ext.P7 is a statutory appeal, the 1st respondent-Land Revenue Commissioner is bound to consider the same in accordance with law and pass orders thereon, within a reasonable time. As the petitioner has been running the business for a considerably long time, it will be only just and proper that the 1st respondent-Land Revenue Commissioner considers the stay petition also WP(C) NO. 25438 OF 2022 5 expeditiously.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent-Land Revenue Commissioner to consider Ext.P7 appeal filed by the petitioner, within a period of six weeks, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) NO. 25438 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25438/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.D5/41762/2014/D.DIS(8/KAS) IN FORM NO.LE -1 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.0074/2022 OF KUMBALA POLICE STATION DATED 16-1-2022 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING OF THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KASARGOD, DATED 1- 6-2022, Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14-6- 2022 IN WRIT PETITION. NO.18581/2022 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN DEFENCE BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT, Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS FILE NO.DCKSGD/2087/2021/DS. DATED 13-7- 2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL LRA5/297582/22 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 21-7-2022 RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL