To seek a mandamus, the applicant must establish a legal right to the performance of a legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought.

1. Petitioner, has made an application dated 06.08.2013 under Rule 19 (2) of the Tamilnadu Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1959, in Form-I, to the District Collector, Vellore District, the 1st respondent, for removal of brick earth from a lake. Pursuant to the same, the District Collector, vide proceedings in R.C.No.678/2013 (Minerals) dated 14.08.2013, has directed the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Irrigation Deptt., Mal Palar Division, Katpadi, Vellore District, to grant a 'No Objection Certificate', and to send a Field Inspection Report.

2. Material on record, further discloses that when the request for granting permission was pending before the District Collector, Vellore, a lawyer's notice dated 02.09.2013, has been sent to the District Collector and other respondents. In response to the same, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranipet, has sent a reply dated 13.09.2013 to Mr.Nanda Kumar, Advocate stating that, vide letter dated 30.08.2013, the Tahsildar, Wallaja Taluk, Vellore, has been directed to conduct an enquiry and submit a report.

3. Contending inter alia that the request of the petitioner, for grant of permission to take sand from the lake in S.No.667, is pending consideration with the District Collector, Vellore District, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition for a mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission for taking lake sand in Mangkuppam Village lake Survey No.667, for production of country bricks, in Survey No.592/2b 31.0 Ares, 592/3b 61.5 Ares, 592/3C, 3.0 Ares and 593/2 11.5 Ares situated at Nanthialayam Village, Walaja Taluk, Vellore District.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

5. Before adverting to the facts of this case, let me extract few decisions on mandamus.

(a) In the decision reported in (1996) 9 SCC 309 (State of U.P. and Ors. v. Harish Chandra and Ors.) in paragraph 10, the Apex Court held as follows:

10. ...Under the Constitution a mandamus can be issued by the court when the applicant establishes that he has a legal right to the performance of legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought and the said right was subsisting on the date of the petition....

(b) In the decision reported in (2004) 2 SCC 150 (Union of India v. S.B. Vohra) the Supreme Court considered the said issue and held that 'for issuing a writ of mandamus in favour of a person, the person claiming, must establish his legal right in himself. Then only a writ of mandamus could be issued against a person, who has a legal duty to perform, but has failed and/or neglected to do so.

(c) In the decision reported in (2008) 2 SCC 280 (Oriental Bank of Commerce v. Sunder Lal Jain) in paragraphs 11 and 12 the Supreme Court held thus,

11. The principles on which a writ of mandamus can be issued have been stated as under in The Law of Extraordinary Legal Remedies by F.G. Ferris and F.G. Ferris, Jr.:

Note 187.-Mandamus, at common law, is a highly prerogative writ, usually issuing out of the highest court of general jurisdiction, in the name of the sovereignty, directed to any natural person, corporation or inferior court within the jurisdiction, requiring them to do some particular thing therein specified, and which appertains to their office or duty. Generally speaking, it may be said that mandamus is a summary writ, issuing from the proper court, commanding the official or board to which it is addressed to perform some specific legal duty to which the party applying for the writ is entitled of legal right to have performed.

Note 192.-Mandamus is, subject to the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, the appropriate remedy to enforce a plain, positive, specific and ministerial duty presently existing and imposed by law upon officers and others who refuse or neglect to perform such duty, when there is no other adequate and specific legal remedy and without which there would be a failure of justice. The chief function of the w