Kerala High Court
K.M.Mathew vs The Principal Accountant General (Rsa) on 23 January, 2020
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 3RD MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K)
PETITIONER:
K.M.MATHEW
AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. K.C. MATHEW,
KUZHUVOMMANNIL HOUSE, KURAVANKUZHY P O,
PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689548.
BY ADV. SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (RSA),
OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR,
DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
PATTOM PALACE (P O), KESAVADASAPURAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
3 THE GEOLOGIST,
MINING AND GEOLOGY PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT OFFICE,
MINI CIVIL STATION, ARANMULA P O,
PATHANAMTHITTA-689533.
R2-3 BY SRI S KANNAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.01.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).1831/2020(D), THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) &
WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 3RD MAGHA, 1941
WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D)
PETITIONER:
K.M.MATHEW,
AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. K.C.MATHEW,
KUZHUVOMMANNIL HOUSE, KURAVANKUZHY (PO),
PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 548
BY ADV. SRI.JOBI JOSE KONDODY
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
INDUSTRIES (A ) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT GENERAL (RSA),
OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNT GENERAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
3 THE DIRECTOR,
DIRECTORATE OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
PATTOM PALACE (PO), KESAVADASAPURAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004
4 THE GEOLOGIST,
MINING AND GEOLOGY PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT OFFICE,
MINI CIVIL STATION, ARNAMULA (PO),
PATHANAMTHITTA-689 533
5 MR. S.SREEJITH,
GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY PATHANAMTHITTA
DISTRICT OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, ARANMULA (PO)
PATHANAMTHITTA-689 533
BY SRI S KANNAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.01.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).34109/2019(K), THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) &
WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 3
JUDGMENT
[ WP(C).34109/2019 & WP(C).1831/2020 ] Dated this the 23rd day of January 2020 In these writ petitions, W.P.(C) No.34109/2019 is filed challenging Exts.P8, P9 and P10 demand notices whereas W.P.(C) No.1831/2020 seeking to quash Ext.P12, the intimation given by the 4th respondent Geologist in pursuance of Ext.P10 request dated 20.12.2019 of the petitioner asking for issuance of movement permits. As both involve common question of fact and law the facts have been taken from W.P.(C) No.34109 of 2019.
2. Petitioner, being the Managing Director, an authorised person, indulged into a business of quarrying for mining building stones and a crusher unit out of building stones, executed two quarrying lease, under the provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as '1967 Rules' for the sake of brevity) on 21.08.2010 valid upto 20.08.2022 (Ext.P1) WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 4 for mining building stones from 0.2410 hectares of land, and another lease deed for the same period from 0.6751 hectares (Ext.P2) of land situated in different re-survey numbers and stated to have obtained the quarrying permits from the 3rd respondent. Petitioner also obtained another quarrying lease under the provisions of 1967 Rules, which expired on 22.01.2019. An application on 01.04.2019 for compounding of the crusher unit under registered metal crusher unit system for remittance of royalty for mining building stones from the area covered vide Exts.P1 and P2 was submitted. On 26.04.2019 the site was inspected by the 3rd respondent, who found that boundary pillars segregating each quarry had not been erected and accordingly certain directions were issued. On compliance of the directions, petitioner intimated the same to the 3rd respondent.
3. On 18.05.2019, the 3rd respondent measured the entire area with the assistance of the Village Officer and Taluk Surveyor on the basis of the quarry permits, WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 5 and found that petitioner had mined 33063.25 cubic meters of building stones outside the areas covered vide Exts.P1 to P3. Accordingly, show cause notice (Ext.P4) dated 10.06.2019 signed by the 3rd respondent to pay an amount of Rs.59,51,385/- was issued. Petitioner approached the 3rd respondent and made a representation by producing the documents, but no action was taken, which constrained the petitioner to approach this Court through W.P.(C) No.26871 of 2019. This Court, vide Ext.P6 judgment dated 10.10.2019, issued certain directions.
4. Petitioner submitted written submissions dated 16.10.2019 (Ext.P7). But, to the utter dismay of the petitioner, he received three different demand notices (Exts.P8 to P10) on 09.12.2019 issued on 02.12.2019, intimating that the demand notice Ext.P4 originally issued as to why action should not be taken in order to realise Rs.59,51,385/- towards royalty cost and fine for illegal excavation, was cancelled, but directed to pay another WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 6 amount of Rs.2,24,22,311/-.
5. Sri.Jobi Jose Kondody, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner, nor any order was communicated and therefore, the respondent flouted the directions of this Court and was rather astonished to see the impugned orders which contains the element of royalty, tax and fine. Fine can be realised under the provisions of the Penalties of 1967 Rules and the parent Act, i.e., Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, which can be done only if a cognisance is taken by a court on a complaint filed by a competent authority and thus the element of Rs.5,00,000/- in the impugned notice is totally erroneous and not sustainable.
6. Before he could raise the arguments on the merits of the matter, the learned Government Pleader, on the previous date of hearing countenanced the argument of the petitioner by submitting that an appropriate order WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 7 had been passed. On submission of the Counsel, this Court, on the previous date of hearing, called for the movement register. Counter Affidavit has been filed along with the documents including the movement register and order dated 29.11.2019 as Ext.R3(b). He further submitted that the aforementioned order is appealable under Rule 98 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015 and drew the attention of this Court to the provisions of Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 8 as well as the provisos added therein to justify the demand of fine. He also submitted that, no such compliant calling for the court to take cognisance has been filed so far.
7. The Rules, 2015 are framed under the parent Act of 1957, which empowers to take the cognisance under Section 22 and imposition of penalty under Section 21. The Kerala Minerals (prevention of illegal mining, storage and transportation) Rules, 2015, also envisage similar provisions of imposition of penalty and cognisance of offences in this regard, attention of this Court was drawn WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 8 to Rules 29 and 30 of the aforementioned Rules for relegating the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy.
8. In rebuttal, Sri.Jobi Jose Kondody submits that Ext.P12 in W.P.(C) No.1831/2020, read in vernacular, conveys the rejection of the application on simple apprehension of destruction of the evidence which cannot be comprehended in a fair and simple language, or can be expected to be passed by an officer of the rank of a Geologist. The reasons assigned are wholly preposterous and opaque.
9. Sri.S. Kannan, the learned Government Pleader supporting the action calling for the demand of Rs.5,00,000/- as fine, submitted that on going through plain and simple provisions of Rule 108, the Government is only empowered to recover rent, royalty or tax but not any fine, and the cognisance can be taken under Rule
110. The pari materia provisions, as noticed above, have been incorporated in the Illegal Transportation of Mineral and Mining Products Rules as well as in the parent Act of WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 9 1957, empowering the competent court to punish the offender for an imprisonment or fine or both.
10. Having considered the rival arguments, documents and the provisions of the law, I am of the view that Rule 98 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, envisage a period of two months to file an appeal by any aggrieved person against the order passed by the competent authority or by an officer in 'Form O' to the Appellate Authority, appointed by the Government by notification in Gazettes. Rule 98 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, is extracted hereinbelow:-
"98. Form of appeal.--(1) (a) Any person aggrieved by any order made by the competent authority or authorised officer, as the case may be, under these rules, may, within two months from the date of communication of the order to him, prefer an appeal in Form O to the Appellate Authority appointed by the Government in this behalf by notification in the Gazette.
(b) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Appellate Authority under clause (a) may, within one month from the date of communication of such order to him, prefer a second appeal in Form O to the final Appellate Authority appointed by Government in this behalf by notification in the Gazette:
Provided that any such appeal, under clause (a) or clause (b), may be entertained after the period specified therein if the appellant satisfies the Appellate Authority or Final Appellate Authority, as the case may be, that he WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 10 had sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time.
(c) Every appeal memorandum, under clause (a) and clause (b) shall be accompanied by the treasury receipt showing that a fee of five hundred rupees has been remitted in the Government Treasury to the credit of the Government under the remittance Head of the Department of Mining and Geology.
(2) In every appeal memorandum, under sub-
rule (1) the authority against whose order the appeal is preferred shall be impleaded as a party;
(3) Along with the appeal memorandum under sub-rule (1) the appellant shall submit as many copies thereof as there are parties impleaded under sub-rule (2);
(4) On receipt of the appeal memorandum and the copies thereof the Appellate Authority or the Final Appellate Authority, as the case may be, shall send a copy of the appeal memorandum to each of the parties impleaded under sub-rule (2) specifying a date on or before which he may make his representation if any, against the appeal"
11. It would also be expedient to extract provisions of Rule 29 and 30 of the Kerala Minerals (prevention of illegal mining, storage and transportation) Rules, 2015 as well as Sections 21 and 22 of the parent Act, 1957 are extracted hereinbelow:
Rule 29 and 30 of the Kerala Minerals (prevention of illegal mining, storage and transportation) Rules, 2015:-
"29. Penalty.-- Whoever contravenes the provisions of these rules shall be punishable with the penalty provided for in sub-section (2) of Section 21 of the Act.
30. Cognizance of offences.-- No court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under these rules except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorised under Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 11 (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 or Clause (ii) of Rule 2 of these rules, by the State Government or the competent authority."
Sections 21 and 22 of the parent Act, 1957:-
"21. Penalties.- (1) Whoever contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) of Section 4 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees per hectare of the area.
(2) Any rule made under any provision of this Act may provide that any contravention thereof shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees, or with both, and in the case of a continuing contravention, with additional fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees for every day during which such contravention continues after conviction for the first such contravention.
(3) Where any person trespasses into any land in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 4, such trespasser may be served with an order of eviction by the State Government or any authority authorised in this behalf by that Government and the State Government or such authorised authority may, if necessary, obtain the help of the police to evict the trespasser from the land.
(4) Whenever any person raises, transports or causes to be raised or transported without any lawful authority, any mineral from any land, and, for that purpose, uses any tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing, such mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing shall be liable to be seized by an officer or authority specially empowered in this behalf.
(4A) Any mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing seized under sub-section (4) shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the Court competent to take congnizance of the offence under sub-section (1) and shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such Court.
(5) Whenever any person raises, without any lawful authority, any mineral from any land, the State Government may recover from such person the mineral so raised, or where such mineral has already been WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 12 disposed of, the price thereof, and may also recover from such person, rent, royalty or tax, as the case may be, for the period during which the land was occupied by such person without any lawful authority.
(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an offence under sub-section (1) shall be cognizable.
22. Congnizance of Offences.- No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government."
12. On comparison of all the aforementioned provisions, it is evident that it is only the court which is empowered to impose a punishment for a term of 5 year and with fine or both, and the power to take cognisance is only put into motion on the receipt of complaint by an authorised officer on behalf of the Central or State Government. It is a matter of record no such complaint had been filed. However, Exts.P8, P9 and P10 notices, contains the element of royalty or tax and also fine of Rs.5,00,000/-. Thus, noticing the aforementioned provisions, I am of the view that there is force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to incompetency of the Geologist to impose the WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 13 fine as it is within the domain of the court alone.
13. Without commenting further on the merit and demerit, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise the matter in case he chooses to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority constituted by the Government vide a separate notification invoking Rule 98 of the Mines and Minerals Concessions Rules. Since the petitioner had approached this Court he will be at liberty to seek exclusion of the time of two months spent for the purpose of this writ petition as there is no such provision in the Act or the Rules, excluding the applicability of the provisions of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Accordingly the writ petitions are disposed of by setting aside the impugned demand notices (Exts.P8, P9 and P10) in part qua fine only and the order Ext.P12 in W.P.(C) No.1831/2020. The petitioner is relegated to avail the remedy of appeal in view of the observations made hereinabove. He shall also be at liberty to file interim application, if permissible in law and if such an WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 14 application is filed, the competent authority shall consider the same as expeditiously as possible, within a period of 15 days thereafter.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE Skk//07022020 WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 15 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34109/2019 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 21.8.2010 VALID UPTO 20.08.2022 FOR MINING BUILDING STONES FROM 0.2410 HECTARES OF LAND COMPRISED IN RE-
SURVEY NO.13/1 PT, 13/2 PT AND 13/2-1 PT OF THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE, IN THIRUVALLA TALUK OF PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 21.08.2010 VALID UPTO 20.08.2022 FOR MINING BUILDING STONES FROM 0.6751 HECTARES OF LAND COMPRISED IN RE-
SURVEY NO.22/1 PT, 22/2 PT 22/3 PT 22/4 PT AND 22/5 PT OF THOTTAPUZHASSERY VILLAGE IN THIRUVALLA TALUK OF PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 23.1.2012 FOR MINING BUILDING STONES FROM 0.1380 HECTARES OF LAND COMPRISED IN SURVEY NOS.3/19, 13/9-1, 13/9-2 OF THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE IN THIRUVALLA TALUK OF PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 10.06.2019 SIGNED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT ON 12.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17.07.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO EXHIBIT P4 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.10.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO.26871 OF 2019.
WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 16 EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTES SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 16.10.2019.
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.166/2010 OF VENNIKULAM SRO IN PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT EXECUTED BETWEEN JOSEPH MATHEW AND LEELAMMA MATHEW IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.
167/2010 OF VENNIKULAM SRO IN PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT EXECUTIVE BETWEEN JOSEPH MATHEW AND LEELAMMA MATHEW IN FAVOUR OF THE WIFE OF PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVALLA, DATED 16.08.2017 INITIATING ACTION AGAINST THE VENDOR OF THE PETITIONER IN EXHIBITS P11 AND P12 SALE DEEDS.
EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT AND SKETCH PREPARED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THOTTAPPUZHASSERY, DATED 03.06.2019. EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14/08/2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT OF THE INCIDENT PUBLISHED IN THE 'HINDU DAILY' DATED 12/04/2016.
WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 17 EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE CASE DIARY SUBMITTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKUTTOM BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- II, ATTINGAL DATED 02/04/2016 WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 03/01/2020 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R3 (A) A TRUE COPY OF THE AUDIT MEMORANDUM NO.16 DATED 03/09/2019 PREPARED BY THE SENIOR AUDIT OFFICER CONSEQUENT TO JOINT INSPECTION CONDUCTED ON 30/8/2019 EXHIBIT R3 (B) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/11/2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION EXHIBIT R3 (C) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF DESPATCH CUM STAMP ACCOUNT REGISTER MAINTAINED AT THE OFFICE FO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29/11/2019 PERTAINING TO EXHIBIT P3(B) EXHIBIT R3 (D) A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 3/1/2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION EXHIBIT R3 (E) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF DESPATCH CUM STAMP ACCOUNT REGISTER MAINTAINED AT THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT PERTAINING TO EXHIBIT P3(D) DATED 3/1/2020 WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 18 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1831/2020 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 21.08.2010 VALID UPTO 20.08.2022 FOR MINING BUILDING STONES FROM 0.2410 HECTARES OF LAND COMPRISED IN RE-SURVEY NO.13/1 PT, 13/2 PT AND 13/2-1 PT OR THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE IN THIRUVALLA TALUK OF PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE DATED 21.08.2010 VALID UPTO 20.08.2022 FOR MINING BUILDING STONES FROM 0.6751 HECTARES OF LAND COMPRISED IN RE-SURVEY NO.22/1 PT, 22/2PT, 22/3 PT AND 22/5 PT OF THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE IN THIRUVALLA TALUK OF PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.10.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P(C)NO.26871 OF 2019 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 13.12.2019 IN W.P() NO.34109 OF 2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT OF THE INCIDENT PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU DAILY DATED 12.04.2016 WP(C).No.34109 OF 2019(K) & WP(C).No.1831 OF 2020(D) 19 EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE CASE DIARY SUBMITTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKUTTOM BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ATTINGAL, DATED 02.04.2016 WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.12.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
03.01.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 04.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 16.12.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT W.P(C)0 NO.34413 OF 2019 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL