Kerala High Court
M/S Sree Siva Granites vs Shaji A.K on 8 April, 2026
2026:KER:31755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SOUMEN SEN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1948
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2026 IN WP(C)
NO.10463 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/9TH RESPONDENT/9TH RESPONDENT:
M/S SREE SIVA GRANITES,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SAVITHRI
THAMPAN, RESIDING AT KOLIYAR, ATTENGANAM P.O,
ANANDASRAM, KASARGOD, PIN - 671531
BY ADVS.
SMT.SARITHA THOMAS
SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
RESPONDENTS/APPLICANT AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8, 10, &
11/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8, 10 & 11:
1 SHAJI A.K, AGED 51 YEARS
S/O KURYAKOSE,RESIDING AT ARAKKAL HOUSE,
PERINKARI PO, KANNUR DISTRICT,
KANNUR, PIN - 670706
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM,
PIN - 695001
3 ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF VIGILANCE (B), SECRETARIATE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
4 THE DIRECTOR,
DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM PALACE PO,
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
2026:KER:31755
..2..
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004
5 THE STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT
AUTHORITY,
4TH FLOOR, KSRTC COMPLEX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN - 695036
6 DISTRICT LEVEL VIGILANCE AND MONITORING
COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
KASARGOD COLLECTORATE, KASARGOD, CIVIL STATION,
KASARGOD, PIN - 671121
7 THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST KASARGOD,
DEPARTMENT OF MINING & GEOLOGY, CIVIL STATION,
KASARGOD, PIN - 671121
8 THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PATTOM P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004
9 TALUK SURVEYOR,
VELLARIKUNDU TALUK OFFICE, VELLARIKUNDU,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 671534
0 ADDL.R10: VIJAYA K.K.,
GEOLOGIST, PRESENTLY WORKING AS GEOLOGIST
DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KANNUR
DISTRICT-670 002.
11 ADDL.R11: MAHESH S.,
TC 31/580, NAVADEEPAM, SN NAGAR, HOUSE NO.24,
PETTAH POST, TRIVANDRUM, KERALA- 695 024.
(ADDL.R10 & R11 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
11.12.2025 IN IA NO.1/2025 IN WP(C)
NO.10463/2025).
BY ADVS.
SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.VINITHA B. FOR R2 TO
R7 AND R9
SHRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.) INSTRUCTED BY
SRI.V.HARISH
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
2026:KER:31755
..3..
SRI.RAJAN VISHNURAJ
SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN, SC, FOR R5
SRI.T.NAVEEN, FOR R8
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
2026:KER:31755
..4..
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2026
Soumen Sen, C.J.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The appellant is aggrieved by the direction
contained in Paragraph 14 of the impugned order whereby
the mining activity was interdicted based on the findings in
Ext.R9(a).
3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf
of the appellant submits that the appellant has not got any
notice from the State Environment Impact Assessment
Authority (the SEIAA) to decide as to whether, in the facts
and circumstances of the case, a stop memo is required to
be issued or not and that in fact, an application is pending
before the competent authority for reappraisal of the project
based on the modified plan. Although the SEIAA has filed a
report in the pending proceedings, marked as Ext.R9(a), no
stop memo was issued, presumably on account of the
pendency of the writ petition.
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
2026:KER:31755
..5..
4. The learned Single Judge, in view of the serious
findings in Ext.R9(a), interdicted the appellant from
conducting any further mining activity in the premises,
until the expiry of the six weeks period. As of now, there
has been no determination with regard to the correctness of
the report submitted by the SEIAA. Admittedly, the said
report has not been challenged in the said proceeding.
5. However, considering the fact that prolonged
interdiction might cause prejudice to the functioning of the
writ appellant and at the same time, keeping in mind the
possibility of environmental damage on account of any
illegal mining, we direct the SEIAA to take a decision as to
whether a stop memo is required to be issued or not. In the
event such a decision is not taken and communicated to the
appellant within a period of three weeks from this date, the
order interdicting the appellant from conducting any further
mining activity in the premises shall stand vacated.
6. However, any mining activity carried on by reason
of such default on the part of the SEIAA to act in terms of
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
2026:KER:31755
..6..
this order would not mean flouting of any of the conditions
required for conducting such mining activity.
7. Prima facie, the findings in Ext.R9(a) shows
certain illegal extraction. Any future mining activity shall be
subject to an undertaking to be given by the writ appellant
that all environment clearance conditions shall be strictly
complied with, failing which it will be open for the
authorities concerned to cancel the environmental
clearance. The fact that there has been instances of past
violations and offences have been compounded cannot be a
justification to cause further environmental damage and
exonerated by payment of fine.
The writ appeal is disposed of. The impugned order is
modified to the above extent.
Sd/-
Soumen Sen
Chief Justice
Sd/-
Syam Kumar V.M.
Judge
WA NO. 836 OF 2026
2026:KER:31755
..7..
ds 08.04.2026
