JUDGMENT : ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. 1. The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows: “(i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directing the 3rd Respondent District Geologist to grant the necessary permit to remove the mud and earth from the property of the Petitioner , without insisting on the royalty, as Per Exhibit P7 order issued by the 2nd Respondent, to make it safe from landslide. (ii) To pass such other direction as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard Sri. Benoy K. Kadavan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 3. The case of the petitioners is that they are residing in the close proximity of Chullikkaparambu-Pannikkode road, near Pannikkode Angadi in Kozhikode District. That on 24.6.2018, heavy rains had occurred which resulted in a huge landslide on the back side of the petitioners’ property, whereby large amounts of mud, stones and rocks rolled down and had fallen on the petitioners’ house and the property of the petitioners. Certain parts of the 1st petitioner’s house including toilet, outhouse were fully covered by the landslide along with the uprooted coconut trees and agricultural plants as can be seen from Ext.P1 series of photographs. That in view of the emergency, even the assistance of the Fire Force was called for and the staff of the Taluk Disaster Management Committee under the supervision of the 4th respondent-Tahsildar had rushed to the petitioners' property and had thus removed the sand and debris from the top of the petitioners' house. 4. Moreover, they pushed down the hills cliffs also. Since then, huge debris with mud stones and rocks are lying within the property of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners were constrained to submit Ext.P2 representation dated 25.6.2018 before the 2nd respondent-District Collector in his capacity as the Chairman of the District Disaster Management Committee for further action in the matter. The 2nd respondent-District Collector had forwarded the request of the petitioners to the 3rd respondent-District Geologist and the 4th respondent-Tahsildar as can be seen from Ext.P3 letter dated 3.7.2018. That the 5th respondent-Village Officer had made inspection of the petitioners' property and had submitted Ext.P4 report and had reported regarding the landslide that occurred on 24.6.2018. The 2nd respondent-District Collector had forwarded the request of the petitioners to the 3rd respondent-District Geologist and the 4th respondent-Tahsildar as can be seen from Ext.P3 letter dated 3.7.2018. That the 5th respondent-Village Officer had made inspection of the petitioners' property and had submitted Ext.P4 report and had reported regarding the landslide that occurred on 24.6.2018. It has also been stated in the said report that the debris, sand, mud and rocks can be used for filling of the basement structure of the Cherubadi Higher Secondary School, which is being constructed adjacent to the property of the petitioners. This aspect can be seen from Ext.P4 report dated 15.12.2018 submitted by the 5th respondent-Village Officer to the 4th respondent-Tahsildar. 5. The petitioners were fully willing for the said course of action recommended by the 5th respondent-Village Officer in Ext.P4. But no further action was taken in pursuance of Ext.P4 report of the 5th respondent-Village Officer. Thereafter, the petitioners have been making repeated enquiries with the 2nd respondent-District Collector regarding the steps to be taken for removal of the earth, mud and other debris, which occurred during the landslide. Later, Ext.P5 report dated 14.1.2019 was issued by the 3rd respondent-District Geologist pursuant to the inspection conducted by him on 11.1.2019. In Ext.P5 report, the 3rd respondent-District Geologist has found that there is threat of landslide and the debris of landslide is causing threat to the petitioners’ houses etc. 6. Ext.P5 report dated 14.1.2019 issued by the 3rd respondent-District Geologist to the 2nd respondent-District Collector reads as follows: 7. However, it is insisted by the 3rd respondent-District Geologist in Ext.P5 that the royalty amount in that regard should also be paid. According to the petitioners, the stand taken by the 3rd respondent-District Geologist in Ext.P5 report is not only illegal and improper, but also, his stand, which no reasonable authority can ever take, since the petitioners have already faced a tragedy on account of the natural calamity, which resulted in huge debris and mud, which got accumulated in the area. Over and above that, the 3rd respondent-District Geologist is insisting that the petitioners, who are the victims of the tragedy should also have to pay money from their pockets by way of royalty for such mud and debris. Over and above that, the 3rd respondent-District Geologist is insisting that the petitioners, who are the victims of the tragedy should also have to pay money from their pockets by way of royalty for such mud and debris. It is pointed out that the issue of royalty will come into play only if the petitioners had taken any positive action to extract such mud or ordinary earth, which is not the instant case. 8. The petitioners have filed Ext.P6 representation dated 24.1.2019 before the 2nd respondent-District Collector seeking relaxation of the insistence of collection of royalty as made out in Ext.P5 as the mud and debris got accumulated only on account of natural calamity and not on account of any action of the petitioners. Thereupon, the 2nd respondent-District Collector vide Ext.P7 dated 22.3.2019 had directed the 3rd respondent-District Geologist to take steps for removal of the sand and debris without collecting the royalty. Ext.P7 letter dated 22.3.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent-District Collector reads as follows: 9. The complaint of the petitioners is that in spite of the specific direction issued by none other than the 2nd respondent-District Collector, the 3rd respondent-District Geologist is simply sitting over it and is not taking any steps to permit the petitioners to remove and transport such mud by granting them necessary permission and transit pass etc. 10. By Ext.P5 dated 14.1.2019, the 3rd respondent District Geologist, has, inter-alia, insisted that the petitioners should necessarily pay the royalty amount. Whereas the 2nd respondent-District Collector as per Ext.P7 dated 22.3.2019 has taken the considered stand that steps for removal of the sand and debris will have to done without collecting royalty. It is beyond any dispute that the debris, mud and ordinary earth have fallen down only on account of the natural calamity and disaster that has happened due to the landslides in question. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of the respondents to ensure that the said debris are duly removed without any further delay. It is beyond any dispute that the debris, mud and ordinary earth have fallen down only on account of the natural calamity and disaster that has happened due to the landslides in question. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of the respondents to ensure that the said debris are duly removed without any further delay. Since the said debris by way of mud and ordinary earth have got collected in huge quantity only on account of the natural calamity and disaster due to the occurrence of the landslides, it cannot be even imagined for a moment that the said ordinary earth has got collected on account of the extraction done by the petitioners for winning of the said minor mineral or that it is a conscious decision on the part of the petitioners for extracting ordinary earth for any legitimate activity like excavation of earth for construction activity or such other aspects on account of their own volition. Whereas the debris, mud and ordinary earth have got collected only on account of the disaster and therefore in such a scenario there is no question of demanding that the petitioners should necessarily pay royalty amount before the debris could be removed from there. In the light of the abovesaid aspects, this Court is of the considered view that such a stand of the 3rd respondent District Geologist, as reflected in Ext.P5 that the petitioners should necessarily pay royalty amount for removing such debris and mud, which occurred only on account of the natural calamity, is, not only illegal and improper, but is also highly unreasonable and would amount to unreasonableness inasmuch as no reasonable authority properly instructed on facts and law, would have ever arrived at such a conclusion. The question of royalty would come into play only if the petitioners had taken any positive action on their own to extract such mud or ordinary earth. But in a case, where admittedly, the mud and debris have got accumulated only on account of natural calamity, there is absolutely no question of the 3rd respondent demanding for royalty amount to be paid by the petitioners for removal of such debris and for granting permission for issuance of transit pass etc. 11. But in a case, where admittedly, the mud and debris have got accumulated only on account of natural calamity, there is absolutely no question of the 3rd respondent demanding for royalty amount to be paid by the petitioners for removal of such debris and for granting permission for issuance of transit pass etc. 11. This Court now need not quash Ext.P4 for the simple reason that the 2nd respondent-District Collector has taken the right and reasonable decision as per Ext.P7, whereby it has been ordered that there is absolutely no question of demanding any royalty to be paid by the petitioners for removal of such mud and debris, and all what has to be ensured is that such removed debris and mud should not be used for any unlawful purposes like illegal reclamation etc. 12. Accordingly, it is ordered that the 3rd respondent-District Geologist will immediately conduct a site inspection with prior notice to the petitioners and the 5th respondent – Village Officer to ascertain the quantity of the mud, debris etc. that has to be removed from the abovesaid site and necessary transit passes should also be issued for the transportation of the said materials from the site in question to the place suggested by the 5th respondent-Village Officer. Action in this regard should be duly completed by the 3rd respondent-District Geologist and 5th respondent-Village Officer within 1 month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. If the 3rd respondent-District Geologist is not taking any expeditious action for issuance of transit pass, it will be open to the 5th respondent-Village Officer to supervise the removal of such debris, mud etc. by the petitioners. The 5th respondent should take immediate steps as pointed out in Ext.P4 letter dated 15.12.2018 so that such removed debris, soil etc. are transported at the instance of the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, to be used for filling the basement structure of the Higher Secondary School as mentioned in Ext.P4 or for any other appropriate use. 13. Since the abovesaid accumulation of mud, debris etc. are transported at the instance of the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, to be used for filling the basement structure of the Higher Secondary School as mentioned in Ext.P4 or for any other appropriate use. 13. Since the abovesaid accumulation of mud, debris etc. occurred on account of a natural disaster, the 2nd respondent-District Collector in his capacity as the Chairperson of the District Disaster Management Committee should exercise his powers under the District Disaster Management Authority Act, 2005 to ensure that the abovesaid process of removal of mud and debris from the property of the petitioners are effected immediately by the 5th respondent-Village Officer to ensure that the said materials are not used for any unlawful purposes as pointed out in Ext.P7 letter. Steps in this regard should be duly completed by the 2nd respondent-District Collector and the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, without any further delay, at any rate, within 2 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 14. The petitioners will produce certified copies of this judgment along with the copies of the memorandum of this W.P. (C) with all the exhibits before respondents 2 to 5 for necessary information and further action. 15. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.