P. Ramachandran And Ors. vs The State Of Kerala Represented By The ... on 8 April, 1970
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case
as also the submissions made across the bar, I find from a perusal
of the averments in the writ petitions that, within the period of
thirty days from the date of submission of the applications for
renewal, there was no communication from the respondent
Panchayat to the petitioners, indicating that the applications for
renewal had been rejected. Taking cue from the decisions of this
Court in Rajesh Ramachandran v. Corporation of Trivandrum
[2008 (3) KLT 419], which was affirmed by a Division Bench in
Sudhakaran v. Pallichal Grama Panchayat [2016 (2) KLT 175], I
find that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the deeming
-3-
W.P.(C). Nos. 16706 of 2018 & Con.cases
provision under Section 236(3) of the Panchayat Raj Act and
consequently, certificate indicating that they have a deemed
license to carry out the quarrying / Crusher operations for the year
2018-2019, as applied for. I therefore, allow the writ petition by
directing the respondent Panchayat to issue certificates stating
that the petitioners are entitled to deemed license in terms of
Section 236(3) of the Panchayat Raj Act, for carrying on the
quarrying/crusher operations for the year 2018-2019. The
respondent Panchayat shall issue the certificate to the petitioners
within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment. I make it clear that nothing in this judgment shall
stand in the way of the respondent Panchayat initiating any
proceedings for cancellation of the said license, in the event of
them finding that the petitioners are carrying on the
quarrying/crusher operations in violation of the conditions in the
deemed license or in violation of any of the statutory provisions.