Kerala High Court
Dileep Kumar T.C vs Mohammed Hanish on 6 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
CON.CASE(C) NO. 192 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.28365 OF 2021 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/5th PETITIONER:
DILEEP KUMAR T.C.
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KUDUKKEN HOUSE, PERITHATTA AMSOM AND
DESOM, PERINTHATTA NORTH, P.O.ARAVANCHAL, KANNUR
DISTRICT - 670 353.
BY ADVS.
V.HARISH
RAJAN VISHNURAJ
RESPONDENTS/1ST RESPONDENT:
1 MOHAMMED HANISH
(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
ADDL.R2 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
KANNUR.
*ADDL R2 IS IMPLEADED SUO MOTU VIDE ORDER DATED
19.10.2023 IN COC 192/22
ADDL.R3 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL), KANNUR,
NEAR KERALA ARMED POLICE IV BATTALION, DHARMASALA,
KANNUR, KERALA -670 567.
**ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 01.02.2024 IN IA
1/24 IN COC 192/22.
BY ADVS.
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, (ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL)
T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH, (GOVERNMENT PLEADER)
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022
..2..
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2024 Petitioner herein is the petitioner in W.P(C)No.28365/2021. The instant contempt is initiated alleging willful disobedience of the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 10.12.2021, in the above referred Writ Petition. The operative portion of the said order is extracted herebelow:
"There will be an interim direction to the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P12 representation preferred by the petitioners and to consider and pass appropriate orders on the same and issue necessary directions after hearing them through any appropriate means including video conferencing within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022
..3..
2. It is not in dispute that, at the time when the contempt was initiated, no orders were passed by the 1st respondent in compliance of the above referred direction. However, when the contempt case was pending, the 1st respondent issued G.O. (Rt)No.179/2022/ID dated 01.03.2022, after consideration of Ext.P12 representation. The operative portion of the said order is also extracted herebelow.
"7.Government have examined the case in detail on the basis of the report submitted by Director, Mining & Geology Department, District Collector, Kannur, Geologist, Kannur and arguments put forth by the Counsel of the petitioner. Some practical difficulties are mentioned in the report of the Mining & Geology Director, on the proper implementation of Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 to seize the illegally extracted minerals. Accordingly orders are issued by Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..4..
authorizing Mining & Geology Director to furnish a proposal containing the following facts, within a period of one month without fail, for resolving the issues & allegations raised against the illegal laterite (building stone) mining.
1. A proposal to constitute an inter departmental official team comprising officials from Mining & Geology department, Police Department and Revenue Department, for conducting regular inspections in the field to prevent illegal mining of laterite stones at the source and its transportation.
2. list out the practical difficulties being faced on the proper implementation of Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and remedies thereof.
3. specific remarks on filing complaint before police in cases of illegal mining, enabling the Geologists to register FIR under 379 of IPC.Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022
..5..
8. The orders of the Hon'ble High Court vide its interim order read as 2nd paper above is complied with accordingly."
3. Now, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the G.O. above referred dated 01.03.2022, does not amount to compliance of the directions contained in the interim order of this Court dated 10.12.2021. The learned counsel would submit that, pursuant to the practical difficulties, dealt with under serial nos.2 and 3 in paragraph no.7 of G.O. (extracted above), has not been addressed by the Government so far and no final orders have been passed. According to the learned counsel, the present G.O. would only constitute an interim order. So long as a final order is not passed in tune with the directions contained in the interim order of this Court, the Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..6..
directions cannot be construed as complied with, wherefore, a contempt would lie, is the submission made. Learned counsel would also submit that, unless a final order is passed, the petitioners will be handicapped to challenge the same.
4. In answer to the above, learned Additional Advocate General would submit that, the directions contained in the interim order has been fully complied with, by issuance of G.O. dated 01.03.2022. The learned Additional Advocate General would emphasize that, the direction was only to consider Ext.P12 representation and to pass appropriate orders on the same and issue necessary directions. Ext.P12 has been considered and G.O. afore referred has been issued. During the course of consideration, some practical difficulties were identified in the context of implementation of Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..7..
('the Act' for short). Taking stock of the same, orders have been issued, which are encapsulated in serial nos.1, 2 and 3, in the subject G.O. Learned Additional Advocate General would point out that, the petitioner has no right to insist that his representation should either be allowed in toto or dismissed, failing which the directions contained in the interim order cannot be construed, as not complied with. Once Ext.P12 representation has been considered and orders passed, no further proceedings in contempt can be initiated. As regards the subsequent order passed by this Court dated 06.06.2023 directing the Government Pleader to get specific instructions regarding the steps taken pursuant to the G.O. issued by the Government, it is the submission of the learned Additional Advocate General that, the said interim order is beyond the scope of a contempt proceedings. The petitioner can challenge, or for that matter, redress his grievance, if any, in the Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..8..
pending Writ Petition, is the final submission made by the learned Additional Advocate General.
5. Although, this Court finds that, the concern raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is a matter of serious public importance, this Court has to notice that the same is beyond the scope of the contempt jurisdiction. As already pointed out, the interim order was to consider and pass orders in Ext.P12 representation. One among the issues which was espoused in Ext.P12 was with respect to implementation of Section 21(5) of the Act. It cannot be said on a perusal of G.O. dated 01.03.2022 that Ext.P12 has not been considered. The very fact that the 1st respondent identified certain practical difficulties in the context of implementation of Section 21(5) itself would vouch that Ext.P12 has been considered. The G.O. suggests certain further actions to be done, which includes a course to list out the practical Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..9..
difficulties in implementing Section 21(5) and also the remedies thereof. It also directs specific remarks on filing complaint before the Police in cases of illegal mining, enabling the Geologist to register FIR under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, as well. These are the matters to be included in a proposal.
6. It could thus be seen that, Ext.P12 has been considered and certain actions were directed. The G.O. may not have redressed the grievance of the petitioners in full, or it may be the case that the petitioners do not endorse the way in which Ext.P12 representation has been considered and disposed of. If that be the situation, the course of the petitioners is to challenge the same in accordance with law, either in the pending Writ Petition or in such other manner, as advised. This Court is convinced that there exists no contempt, in the sense, there is no willful disobedience of Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..10..
the interim order passed by this Court dated 10.12.2021.
7. In the circumstances, leaving open all such other remedies available to the petitioners in accordance with law, this contempt action is closed.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE TR Con.Case(C).No. 192 of 2022 ..11..
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 192/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 10/12/2021 IN WP(C) NO.28365 OF 2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. Annexure A2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07/01/2022 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL OF THE PETITIONER.
Annexure A3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED 12/01/2022.
Annexure A4 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ILLEGAL MINING THE TRANSPORTATION OF LATERITE IN PERINGOME, PERINTHALA AND ERAMOM VILLAGES IN HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS.
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R(a) A TRUE COPY OF G.O. 1241/22/ID DATED 22.11.22