2012 Supreme(Mad) 3397
High Court of Judicature at Madras
ELIPE DHARMA RAO & M. VENUGOPAL, JJ.
K. Manthesh Kuttan & Others
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary to Government, Department of Agriculture and Production & Others
Writ Petitions No.28406 of 2011 with M.P.Nos.1 of 2011, 2 of 2011 & 1 of 2012, 28447 of 2011 with M.P.No.1 of 2011 & 1 of 2012 & M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 in W.P.No.9860 of 2008
Decided On : 03-08-2012
For the Petitioners:Mrs. Nalini Chidambaram for M/s. C. Uma, Advocates.
For the Respondents:S.T.S. Moorthy, Mrs. A. Srijayanthy, Spl. Govt. Pleaders, Elephant G. Rajendran, Advocates.
The larger interest of society should outweigh the benefit of a smaller section of society for the common good of all.
Headnote:
Interpretation - Order passed by Division Bench - W.P.No.9860 of 2008 - G.O.Ms.No.135 - Protection of flora and fauna - Illegal mining - Usage of heavy vehicles for agricultural purposes - Nilgiris District
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the interpretation of an order passed by a Division Bench in W.P.No.9860 of 2008, which aimed to protect the flora and fauna of the Nilgiris District and curb illegal mining activities. The petitioners sought permission to use heavy vehicles for agricultural and construction purposes in the district.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the district administration correctly understood and implemented the order of the court, which prohibited the usage of heavy vehicles for agricultural purposes in the Nilgiris District. The court dismissed the writ petitions and leave applications, emphasizing the need to protect the ecosystem and uphold the directions issued in W.P.No.9860 of 2008.
Issues: The main issue was the misinterpretation of the court's order by the official respondents, leading to a ban on the usage of heavy vehicles for agricultural and construction purposes in the Nilgiris District.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the larger interest of society, including the protection of the ecosystem, should outweigh the benefit of a smaller section of society. It emphasized the need to strictly comply with the court's directions and rejected the plea for clarification of the order.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions and leave applications, affirming the district administration's correct understanding and implementation of the court's order.
ELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.
1. Interpretation of the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.9860 of 2008, dated 18.11.2009 is the subject matter in these matters.
2. To better understand the present lis, short background of the cases need to be explained.
3. It all started in the year 2008, when an organisation called 'In Defence of Environment and Animals' (Respondent No.1 in M.P.Nos.1 and 2/2012 in WP.9860 of 2008 and impleaded party in both the above writ petitions) has filed a probono publico in W.P.No.9860 of 2008 against the district administration of The Nilgiris District (respondents 2 to 6 in M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 in WP.9860 of 2008), for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents therein not to allow any mining and quarry operations anywhere in the hills of Nilgiris. It was alleged in the said case that illegal quarrying and mining activities are rampant in the district of Nilgiris for which explosives are being used, driving the animals in the area to find their way into the residential areas and due to flying rock pieces as a result of blasting, some animals also died.
4. In the said matter, series of directions were issued by a Division Bench of this Court on various dates, towards protecting the flora and fauna of the area and also to curb the illegal mining. Nilagiri Mavatta JCB & Poclain Owners Association (the petitioner in W.P.No.28447 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.9860/2008) have filed M.P.No.5 of 2008 in the said writ petition for impleading themselves as parties to the said writ petition on the ground that in view of one or other observation of this Court in W.P.No.9860 of 2008, the respondents in the said writ petition are disturbing the members of their association, who are having JCB, tipper lorries, pocline for usage of the same only for carrying on construction and agricultural activities. Taking up the said impleadment petition along with the main Writ Petition, on 18.11.2009, the Division Bench of this Court has disposed of the said writ petition in the following manner:
"10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. We may only mention that this Court was of the view that no illegal quarry should be made in the Nilgiris area. In fact, for the purpose of maintaining its forest and ecology, it is desirable that no mining is made in the area, much less illegal mining. This Court has not made any observations against one or other individual, either officer or organisation, but it cannot be accepted that JCB, tipper lorries or Pocline are used for agricultural activities, that too in a hilly region like Nilgiris. The buildings may be constructed or demolition may be made, but it should be done only with the permission of the competent authority like Corporation or local Panchayat or Collector. If permission is granted for construction of a building or demolition of a building, in such case, one may use heavy vehicle like JCB, tipper lorries or Pocline on permission, but otherwise, we find no ground made out as to why JCB, tipper lorries and Pocline should be used for agriculture or any other purpose. If the respondents intends to check illegal mining activities and for that if they intend to regulate the movement of JCB, tipper lorries, Pocline and other heavy vehicles, we leave it open for the competent authorities, who may do so in the interest of administration and protection of ecology.
11. So far as illegal mining is concerned, the authorities like the Administrative Officer, Tahsildar, officer-in-charge of the Department of Ecology and Mining at the District Level and the police officer in-charge of the area concerned are directed to be vigilant and to ensure that the Government guideline contained in G.O.Ms.No.135 dated 13th Nov., 2009, issued from the Industries (MMA.1) Department is followed and no illegal quarry be made in the Nilgiris; in case such illegal quarry is found in one or other area, the competent authority may ho