AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Antony Dominic, J.—Petitioner approached this Court claiming that he was conducting quarrying operations on the strength of required licenses, copies of which have been produced as Exts.P1 to P8. According to the Petitioner, without any valid reasons, the 2nd Respondent issued Ext.P9 order withdrawing Ext.P8 consent. It is challenging Ext.P9, order mainly complaining of violation of principles of natural justice that this writ petition has been filed.
When the writ petition came up for orders, the learned Government Pleader reported that before the filing of the writ petition, proceedings were initiated, the quarry of the Petitioner was inspected by the Superintendent of Police, Wayanad and Sub Collector, Mananthavady and that noticing that the quarrying was being operated without any licence Crime No. 7/2011 of the Vythiri Police Station was registered.
Since these facts are not pleaded in the writ petition, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to file a statement. Accordingly statement dated 26.3.2011 has been filed. The statement shows that on the aforesaid allegations Crime No. 7/2011 of the Vythiri Police Station was registered against the Petitioner and that he was arrested in connection with the crime on 9.1.2011 and was thereafter enlarged on bail. None of the above facts are disclosed in the writ Petition which was filed on 9.2.2011. In order to explain the suppression of facts, the Petitioner has filed affidavit dated 24.3.2011 in which he has stated thus;
On 08.01.2011, the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police of Vythiri Police Station came to my quarry and informed the staff that I should report to the police station with two sureties. On 09.01.2011, at about 2.30 p.m., myself and my two close friends went to the police station and we were informed by the ASI of Police that investigation is being conducted against all the quarries. I informed the ASI of Police that I have already produced all licenses required under law for conducting the quarry and I am not conducting any illegal activities. Then I was told by the ASI of police that I need only sign and the sureties also should sign and thereafter, I can go and further told me that since I have all the licenses required under law for conducting quarry, I will have no problem. I left the police station within 10- 15 minutes. As I have not committed any offence, I did not consider the proceedings on 09.01.2011 as serious. It is after one month, the above writ petition has been filed and at the time of giving instructions to my counsel, I forgot to give the details of the incident on 09.01.2011. It is not willful.
Admittedly, material facts have been suppressed in the pleadings and a deliberate attempt has been made to mislead this Court. We are also not satisfied with the explanation offered by the Petitioner.
In our view, the Petitioner is guilty of suppression of material facts and for that reason itself we decline to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dismiss the writ petition.
It is directed that the Petitioner shall pay exemplary cost of Rs. 20,000/-, which shall be paid to the Kerala State Legal Services Authority. The payment shall be made within one month from today, failing which the Secretary of the Legal Services Authority will be free to take action to recover the costs.
Issue copy of this judgment to the Secretary, Kerala Legal Services Authority.