C.R.Purushothaman vs State Of Kerala on 23 March, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

C.R.Purushothaman vs State Of Kerala on 23 March, 2010

Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19946 of 2009(K)


1. C.R.PURUSHOTHAMAN,42 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. JOHN MATHEW,52 YEARS,S/O.MATHEW MATHAI,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY SECRETARY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

3. THE THAHASILDAR,THIRUVALLA TALUK,

4. MATHEW,S/O.JOSEPH,KIDAYITHARAYIL HOUSE,

5. K.M.MATHEW @ SAJI,KUZHUVANMANNIL HOUSE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.N.SASI

                For Respondent  :SRI.SATHISH NINAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :23/03/2010

 O R D E R
                       T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      W.P.(C) No.19946 of 2009-K
                    - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2010.

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioners are aggrieved by the quarrying operations conducted by respondents 4 and 5, which according to the petitioners, is unauthorised and is causing damage to the buildings as well as residential houses of the petitioners. It is submitted that huge loss has been caused to them. Earlier, the first petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.29250/2008 before this Court and by Ext.P3 judgment, the second respondent was directed to take appropriate action.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that respondents 4 and 5 have no manner of right to use the puramboke land in an unauthorised and illegal manner.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Govt. Pleader.

4. The fifth respondent has filed a counter affidavit. It is averred that the fifth respondent had purchased the property belonging to the fourth respondent comprised in Sy.No.62/2 and 62/7 of Koipuram village and 14.19 of Thottappuzhasseri village. The entire property comprised in the wpc19946 /2009 2 above survey numbers are lying contiguously and it is full of rock mass. The 4th respondent was conducting blasting operations with requisite licence obtained from the concerned department. In between, there is a Government puramboke comprised in Sy. No.67/8. The 5th respondent had not purchased any right over the Government puramboke comprised in Sy. No.67/8. It is also stated that there are no residential houses within the prohibited distance of the quarry conducted by the 5th respondent. The allegation that the 5th respondent had mined rock from Government puramboke, is denied in the counter affidavit.

5. In the light of the complaint raised by the petitioners, it is only appropriate that the second respondent consider the same and take a decision after hearing the petitioners and respondents 4 and 5.

6. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent to take an appropriate decision in the matter, with regard to the complaint raised by the petitioners regarding unauthorised quarrying and the submission made by the 5th respondent that the quarrying operations will not cause any harm to anybody, after hearing them, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.





                                   (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

wpc19946 /2009    3

kav/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court