The petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by Exhibit P9 order passed by the third respondent directing him to stop the functioning of a quarry that that he has been conducting from 2012 onwards. The case of the petitioner is that, he has all the necessary statutory licences and permissions issued by the various authorities. He also alleges that Exhibit P9 is motivated by extraneous consideration and malafides. Earlier, a similar a stop memo had been issued at the instance of some politically influential persons of the locality. The petitioner had challenged the same in W.P.(C) No.32149 of 2014. By Exhibit P8 judgment dated 03.12.2014, the said order was quashed. Immediately thereafter on 05.12.2014, Exhibit P9 has been passed, more or less on the same allegations. 2. According to Sri.Jobi Jose Kondody, who appears W.P.(C) No.32823 of 2014-C -:2:-
for the petitioner, the impugned order Exhibit P9 has been issued on the basis of some apprehensions entertained by the third respondent. The same has also been issued, without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. An establishment that has been running smoothly from the year 2012, without cause for complaints from any quarter has been directed to be closed down at the mere ipse dixit of the third respondent, it is alleged.
3. Advocate Santhosh Peter Mamalayil appears for the respondent Panchayat.
4. Heard. Inasmuch as Exhibit P9 was not preceded by any proceedings directing the petitioner to show cause against the proposed action, the said proceedings cannot be sustained as a final order passed with due application of mind. The petitioner's quarry has been functioning from the year 2012 onwards on the strength of proper licences and permissions issued by the various authorities. It is only appropriate that such drastic action as contemplated by W.P.(C) No.32823 of 2014-C -:3:-
Exhibit P9 are proposed against a running establishment, an opportunity of hearing is afforded. Such an opportunity not having been given, it is only appropriate that further action be pursued only after hearing the petitioner also.
In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to treat Exhibit P9 as a show cause notice. The petitioner shall submit his explanation to Exhibit P9 within a period of one week from today. If such explanation is submitted, the third respondent shall consider the explanation along with any other input that may be made available to the said authority, afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and any other interested person and shall pass final orders in the matter. Until final orders are passed, in accordance with the above direction, Exhibit P9 shall not be implemented.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE kkj