Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 3010 of 2008(G) 1. VASUDEVAN NAIR,THAYYIL VEEDU ... Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ... Respondent 2. LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR 4. GEOLOGIST,MINING AND GEOLOGY 5. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE 6. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER For Petitioner :SMT.SADHANA KUMARI ESWARI For Respondent :SMT.K.K.THULASY BHAI,SC,POLLUTION C.BOA The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI Dated :26/03/2009 O R D E R V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.3010 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT
The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order passed by the Geologist and Ext.P6 communication by the Pollution Control Board.
2. Insofar as Ext.P5 is concerned, I note that the same is appealable under Rule 49 of the Kerala Miner Mineral Concession Rules. It is open to the petitioner to file an appeal. If such appeal is filed within one month from today, the competent authority shall consider the same as having been filed within time and take an expeditious decision.
3. Insofar as the challenge against Ext.P6 is concerned, the same is only a proposal on the part of the Pollution Control Board to refuse to give consent to operate. The said order is independently appealable under the authorities under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. W.P.(C).No.3010 of 2008 :: 2 ::
The writ petition is closed, reserving the liberty of the petitioner to challenge Ext.P5 and take other appropriate steps against the final order, that would be passed on Ext.P6. The appellate authority shall dispose of the appeal, if any, presented by the petitioner against Ext.P5, within a period of three months from the date of its filing. The other contentions of the petitioner are left open.
Sd/-
(V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//