JUDGMENT : W.P.(C) Nos.17148/2020 and 10534/2021 are filed by the same petitioner and the writ petitions relate to the same legal issue. W.P.(C) No.27773/2020 and W.P.(C) No.28527/2020 are filed by two others, in similar circumstances. In WP(C) No.17148/2020, the petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P9 order rejecting his application for D&O Licence and seeks to declare that he is entitled to the licence in view of Exts.P1 to P6. Pending WP(C) No.17148/2020, the Grama Panchayat issued a communication dated 19.04.2021 informing that the Panchayat has taken a policy decision not to grant D&O Licence for new quarries. The said order, Ext.P10, is under challenge in WP(C) No.10534/2021. 2. In W.P.(C) No.27773/2020, the petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P8 and to declare that the action of the 1st respondent in not processing the application covered by Ext.P6 is highly unjust and illegal. W.P.(C) No.28527/2020 has been filed seeking to quash Ext.P8 therein by holding that the general decision to ban future quarries as per Ext.P5 due to the existence of other quarries, is unconstitutional after calling for the records leading thereto. The petitioner also seeks to declare that he has secured valid Deemed D&O Licence from 15.01.2019 for running the quarry. 3. The disputes in all the four writ petitions arise consequent to a decision taken by the Triprangottoor Grama Panchayat following the resolutions of Grama Sabhas, not to grant D&O Licence to new quarries, citing environmental concerns. The respondents and documents are referred to in this judgment as they are arrayed/marked in WP(C) No.17148/2020. 4. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.17148/2020 is the Managing Partner of M/s.Maria Construction Needs, Vazhamala. The petitioner sought Environmental Clearance (EC) for a quarry to be started, in Survey Nos.275/1A, 274/2 in Thrippangottoor Village of Thalassery Taluk. The petitioner was granted Ext.P1 Environmental Clearance Certificate. The Pollution Control Board issued Ext.P2 Consent to Operate. 5. By Ext.P3, the Deputy Chief Controller granted Ext.P3 approval for Explosives Magazine. Ext.P4 communication of the Geologist stated that the petitioner can be granted Quarrying Lease on production of D&O Licence. The Mining Plan of the petitioner was approved as per Ext.P5 of the Geologist, under Rule 62 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967. The nearby land owners granted Ext.P6 consent. 6. However, the 2nd respondent-Secretary to Grama Panchayat rejected petitioner’s application for D&O Licence, as per Ext.P7. The Mining Plan of the petitioner was approved as per Ext.P5 of the Geologist, under Rule 62 of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967. The nearby land owners granted Ext.P6 consent. 6. However, the 2nd respondent-Secretary to Grama Panchayat rejected petitioner’s application for D&O Licence, as per Ext.P7. By Ext.P8 judgment in WP(C) No.1415/2019, this Court set aside Ext.P7 order and directed to reconsider the application for D&O Licence. The Secretary, however, rejected the application again, as per Ext.P9, for the following reasons: (i) Environmental Clearance Certificate has to be obtained from State Authority. (ii) The proposed quarrying area being landslide prone, prior permission of District Disaster Management Authority is required. (iii) Explosives Licence not produced. (iv) There were instances of landslide in the area and ST families had to be accommodated in Shelters for long duration. (v) The Special Grama Sabhas of Ward Nos.2, 3 and 4 have unanimously resolved not to permit new quarries in the area. (vi) The District Collector has requested NCESS to give a report on the impact of quarries on ecology and till a report is received, it would be inappropriate to issue new quarry licences. 7. The petitioner submitted application invoking the Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking reports relied on by respondents 1 and 2 in rejecting the petitioner's application. The respondents have not divulged any information to the petitioner. On 19.04.2021, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P10 order (in WPC No.10534/2021) rejecting the petitioner’s application holding that the Panchayat Committee has considered the application of the petitioner and decided to reject the same. The petitioner challenges Ext.P10 order in WP(C) No.10534/2021. The applications for D&O Licence submitted by the petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.27773/2020 and 28527/2020 were also not entertained citing same reasons. 8. Respondents 1 and 2, the Panchayat and the Secretary, contested the writ petitions filing counter affidavit. The respondents submitted that the quarry is proposed in a densely populated area and would cause much nuisance in the locality. The Disaster Management Authority has categorised the area as landslide prone. The petitioner has to obtain prior clearance from the District Crisis Management Committee. As per the GSI report, heavy landslide has occurred in this area in the year 2019. There are 28 complaints pending in this regard. The Disaster Management Authority has categorised the area as landslide prone. The petitioner has to obtain prior clearance from the District Crisis Management Committee. As per the GSI report, heavy landslide has occurred in this area in the year 2019. There are 28 complaints pending in this regard. In Ext.R2(c) G.O., the Government has stated that it is the duty of the Grama Panchayat to ensure that projects have the clearance under relevant environmental statutes. 9. The DIEAA, Kannur has proceeded to issue Ext.P1 Environmental Clearance Certificate ignoring the environmental issues faced by the local residents. The NGT has held that DEIAA and DEAC are not competent to appraise projects. There are several other quarries in the area and those should be taken into account as a cluster, while appraising the project, contended the respondents. The Special Grama Sabhas of Ward Nos.2, 3 and 4 have decided that further quarrying permits should not be issued. The Panchayat has already requested the District Collector to obtain a report from the National Centre for Earth Science Studies (NCESS). The petitioner has not submitted Explosives Licence along with his application, contended the respondents. 10. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel representing the Grama Panchayat and the learned Government Pleader representing the additional 3rd respondent-District Disaster Management Authority in WP(C) No.17148/2020. 11. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.17148/2020, as can be seen from Exts.P1 to P6, has obtained requisite licences/permits/consents from statutory authorities to start quarrying operations in the land in question. Respondents 1 and 2, however, declined to issue D&O licence to the petitioner. One of the grounds on which the licence has been declined, is that the petitioner has to obtain EC from the State Authority. Ext.P1 EC has been issued on 24.03.2018 by the District Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Kannur. The argument is that since there are other quarries already functioning, the combined area of which is more than five hectares, EC issued by the SEIAA is required. It may be noted in this regard that the authority of DEIAA to issue EC on the date of issuance of Ext.P1 is not disputed. Ext.P1 EC has not been subjected to challenge even by the Grama Panchayat Authorities. Therefore, respondents 1 and 2 cannot reject the application for D&O Licence submitted by the petitioner on that ground. 12. It may be noted in this regard that the authority of DEIAA to issue EC on the date of issuance of Ext.P1 is not disputed. Ext.P1 EC has not been subjected to challenge even by the Grama Panchayat Authorities. Therefore, respondents 1 and 2 cannot reject the application for D&O Licence submitted by the petitioner on that ground. 12. Respondents 1 and 2 stressed that the area where the quarry is to be established is a landslide prone area as declared by the Disaster Management Authority, that the Panchayat has required the District Collector to obtain a report from the NCESS as to the desirability or otherwise of starting new quarrying operations in the area and hence licence cannot be issued till such report is received. This Court on 29.03.2021, suo moto impleaded the District Disaster Management Authority, Kannur as additional 3rd respondent. The Government Pleader filed a Memo dated 02.07.2021 containing specific remarks of the District Disaster Management Authority. The relevant part of the remarks read as follows: “The Hazard susceptibility area in Kerala (HSAK 2014) was prepared by Kerala State Disaster Management Authority. In HSAK 2014, the Hazard susceptibility area marked as local name of places and no Physical demarcation has to be done to identify the area in field. In the above circumstances, it is a difficult task to find out whether the quarry belongs to the high hazard landslides – prone area. The Kerala State Disaster Management Authority also prepared a landslide zonation satellite map for the demarcation of high hazard landslides prone area. Hence a detailed satellite mapping study by using the geo co ordinates with the help of technical experts is required to find out whether the quarry is on the list of high hazard landslides prone area.” The said remarks are of scant help in deciding the issue. The Recognised Qualified Person (RQP) has submitted a more specific report, which is produced as Ext.P19. 13. The report of the RQP on the Hazard Zone Study of the quarrying lease site categorically states that after studying in detail by superimposing the project area coordinates with the zone classification map published in the Disaster Management Website, it is clear that the project area does not fall within the Red Zone and the same is 140.17 metres away from the project boundary and hence, it is not in the High Hazard Zone. In view of the said report, the contention of the Panchayat based on the possibility of landslides hazard cannot be sustained. As regards Explosives Licence, the petitioner has produced Ext.P3 Form DE-2 Licence issued by the Deputy Controller of Explosives. 14. The further argument is that the Special Grama Sabhas of Ward Nos.2, 3 and 4 have decided unanimously not to permit new quarries. The question then will be whether a Grama Panchayat can refuse statutory licence to a citizen based on majority opinion/decision of Grama Sabhas and to what extent a Grama Panchayat is bound by the decisions of Grama Sabhas. The Grama Sabhas are constituted and governed by the provisions of Chapter II of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Section 3 of the Act,1994 provides that all persons whose names appear in the electoral rolls relating to a village comprised within the area of a Village Panchayat shall be deemed to be constituted as Grama Sabha of such Village. The Member of the Village Panchayat representing the constituency shall be the Convenor of that Grama Sabha. 15. The powers, functions and the rights of Grama Sabha are laid down in Section 3A(1) which reads as follows: “3A. The Member of the Village Panchayat representing the constituency shall be the Convenor of that Grama Sabha. 15. The powers, functions and the rights of Grama Sabha are laid down in Section 3A(1) which reads as follows: “3A. Powers, functions and rights of the Grama Sabha – (1) Grama Sabha shall, in such manner and subject to such procedure, as may be prescribed, perform the following powers and functions, namely: - (a) to render assistance in the collection and compilation of details required to formulate development plans of the Panchayat; (b) to formulate the proposals and fixing of priority of schemes and development programmes to be implemented in the area of Village Panchayat; (c) to prepare and submit to the Village Panchayat a final list of eligible beneficiaries in the order of priority relating to the beneficiary oriented schemes on the basic of the criteria fixed; (d) to render assistance to implement effectively the development schemes by providing facilities locally required; (e) to provide and mobilise voluntary service and contribution in cash or in kind necessary for the development plans; (f) suggesting the location of street lights, street or community water taps, public wells, public sanitation units, irrigation facilities and such other public utility schemes; (g) to formulate schemes to impart awareness on matters of public interest like cleanliness, environmental protection, pollution control and to give protection against social evils like corruption, illicit and clandestine transactions; (h) to promote harmony and unity among various groups of people within the area of the Grama Sabha and to organise arts and sports festivals to develop goodwill among the people of that locality; (i) to monitor and render assistance to the beneficiary communities engaged in the developmental activities within the area of the Village Panchayat. (j) to verify the eligibility of persons getting various kinds of welfare assistance from the Government such as pensions and subsidies; (k) to collect information regarding the detailed estimates of works proposed to be implemented in the area of the Grama Sabha; (l) to make available details regarding the services to the rendered and the activities proposed to be done by the concerned officials in the succeeding three months; (m)to know the rationale behind every decision taken by the Panchayat regarding the area of the Grama Sabha; (n) to know the follow up action taken on the decisions of the Grama Sabha and the detailed reasons for not implementing any of the decisions; (o) to co-operate with the employees of the village panchayats in the sanitation processes and rendering voluntary service for the removal of garbage; (p) to find out the deficiencies in the arrangements for water supply, street lighting etc. within the area of the Grama Sabha and to suggest remedial measures; (q) to assist the activities of parent-teacher associations of the schools within the area of the Grama Sabha; (r) to assist the public health activities especially prevention of diseases and family welfare, within the area of the Grama Sabha. (s) to perform such other functions as may be prescribed from time to time. ” 16. Reading of Sections 3 and 3A would indicate that primarily the Grama Sabhas are constituted to render assistance and prioritise the schemes and development programs of the Panchayat. Promotion of harmony and unity among various groups of people, organising arts and sports festivals etc. are also the functions of the Grama Sabha. Sub-sections (m) and (n) of Section 3A give right to Grama Sabhas to know the rationale behind every decision taken by the Panchayat regarding the area of the Grama Sabha and also to know the follow up actions taken by the decisions of the Grama Sabha and the detailed reasons for not implementing any of the decisions. 17. Though Sections 3, 3A and 3B of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 give wide powers to Grama Sabhas on matters relating to formulation, prioritisation and implementation of general schemes, beneficiary schemes and developmental programs, the Act, 1994 does not empower the Grama Sabhas to interfere with or dabble in the statutory exercise of various powers exercisable by the Panchayat and its functionaries. Any decision by the Grama Sabhas, therefore, cannot affect the powers and functions of the licensing authorities under the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 including the power to issue a licence under Section 233. If Grama Panchayat or Secretary decides not to consider or process or to issue D&O Licence in exercise of the powers under Section 233 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 on the basis of resolutions passed or decision taken by Grama Sabhas, it would amount to abdication of power which is impermissible in law. 18. The orders of respondents 1 and 2 impugned in the writ petitions are therefore liable to be set aside. Ext.P9 in W.P.(C) No.17148/2020, Ext.P10 in W.P.(C) No.10534/2021 and Ext.P8 in W.P.(C) Nos.27773/2020 and 28527/2020 are therefore quashed. The respondents are directed to issue D&O Licence to the petitioners, if the petitioners are otherwise eligible, within a period of four weeks. It is made clear that issuance of licence to the petitioners would be subject to any satellite mapping study that may be conducted by the District Disaster Management Authority and the petitioners shall permit the authorities to conduct such study in the quarrying area, if warranted, without any objection. Writ petitions are disposed of as above. All other issues urged by the petitioners are left open.