1. Writ Petition Nos.21006 and 21007 of 2009 are filed by the respective petitioners, who are the husband and wife and they are the owners of S.F.Nos.151/2A1, 151/2A2, 151/2A3(P) and 152/4D measuring 46. 5 hectares and S.F.No.150/1A4 measuring 23. 0 hectares respectively in Bogampatti village, Palladam taluk, Coimbatore District.

2. They have filed the said writ petitions to forbear the respondents 1 to 4 from sanctioning any planning permission to construct building or approving the lay out within 300 mts. from the quarry site, comprised in the above said survey numbers. It is stated that the first respondent, District Collector granted quarrying lease to the petitioner in W.P.No.21006 of 2009, for a period of five years in the proceedings dated 110. 2002 and that was for quarrying rough stones in the said patta lands and the periods of the said leases in these writ petitions were between 210. 2002 to 210. 2007, 20.12.2002 to 112. 2007,12.02.2009 to 11.02.2014 and 12.02.2009 to 11.02.2014 respectively and the petitioners commenced the quarrying operations.

a) According to the petitioners, there are no inhabited site, natham, residential houses or Government buildings within the radius of 500 mts. from the said quarry site. The petitioners made application to the first respondent District Collector on 20.12.2008 to quarry rough stones for a further period of five years in the said patta lands as per the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959.

b) It is stated that after necessary inspection effected by the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Mines), the District Collector in his proceedings dated 12. 2009, granted the quarrying lease for a further period of five years. Thereafter, an agreement came to be executed on 12. 2009 for the period from 12. 2009 to 12. 2014.

c) It is the case of the petitioners that they are quarrying rough stones by paying the required seigniorage fees for the quantity removed from the leasehold area.It is stated that the adjoining land in S.No.151/2A was also subject to quarry operation by one Nachimuthu S/o.Marappa Gounder. It is stated that there is no inhabited site or residential houses within a distance of 300 mts. from the quarry site as reflected in the order of the District Collector dated 12. 2009 granting lease.

d) As per Rules 36(1-A)(a)and 36(1-A)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, no lease shall be granted within 300 mts. from any inhabited site and no lay out or building plan falling within 300 mts. from the quarry site shall be given approval by any agency unless prior clearance is obtained from the Director of Geology and Mining. The term ‘inhabited site’ is explained in Explanation No.III to Rule 36(1-A)(a), (b) and (c) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules.

e) It is stated that a nearby owner by name, Mr.Pechimuthu Gounder who has been subsequently impleaded as 5th respondent in these writ petitions by order of this Court dated 2. 2010 intended to divide his lands into plots, which is situate adjacent to the petitioners’ lands and sell the same to third parties as housing plots.

f) It is the case of the petitioners that the said site which is within a radius of 300 mts. of the petitioners’ lands, for which quarrying lease was granted by the first respondent District Collector is not either a residential area or inhabited site and as per the Rules, unless the Director of Geology and Mining gives prior clearance, no building plan, etc. can be approved by the respondent/authorities.

g) If such permission for building plan is granted within 300 mts. to the quarry site making the area as inhabited site, the occupant would object to the continuance of quarrying operation and putting up any building within 300 mts. from the quarry site is not suitable and therefore, the petitioners sent a detailed representation to the respondents on 29. 2009, not to grant any approval of lay out of site plan to any one within a radius of 300 mts. from the la