Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
S. Lalitha & Another - Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Chengalpet District & Others - Respondent
W.P. Nos. 14928, 17212, 17215 & 11423 of 2020 & W.M.P. No. 21263 of 2020
Decided On : 18-03-2021
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – Section 15 – Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 – Rule 36 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Lease Deed – Issuance of Writ of declaration – Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of declaration to declare the order passed by the 1st respondent in the proceedings, as null and void and consequently declare the lease deed, registered as document in the office of the Sub-Registrar, executed by the 1st respondent as per the proceedings as null and void and direct the respondents not to permit the 7th respondent in any manner carrying on quarry operations in survey nos.162/1 and 163, Perambakkam Village, Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalpet District.
Finding of court: Road pattern approval was granted without obtaining prior approval from the Department of Geology and Mining which is mandatory in view of the presence of a quarry site within 300 meters from the layout for which approval is sought. – The registration of gift deeds for the road by Lalitha in favour of the Local Authority has no bearing as admittedly Lalitha has not satisfied the mandatory requirements of Rule 36(1-A)(c) of TNMMCR, 1959. – Lalitha will have to necessarily comply with the said requirements. – Having not satisfied the same, the Authorities have rightly rejected the layout approval sought for by Lalitha. – Further, Kandasamy in his pleadings before this Court has contended that he has been enjoying the quarry lease for several years and the latest lease was granted which expires only on 14.06.2025. – No documents have been produced before this Court by either of the parties that Kandasamy was not previously having a quarry lease for the same property. All the official respondents have also taken a consistent stand that the quarry lease granted in favour of Kandasamy has been granted only in accordance with law. – It has been made clear that even if layout has already been approved despite the fact that there is a quarry site within 300 meters radius, the approval of the layout was directed to be cancelled by the Court. – Land owner was in a better position as his layout was already approved but even then, a learned Single Judge of this Court held that the approval granted to the layout will have to be cancelled due to the violation of Rule 36(1-A)(c) of TNMMCR, 1959. In the case on hand, no layout approval has been granted and therefore, Lalitha stands on a much weaker wicket and therefore, this Court is of the considered view that there is no merit in the relief sought for by her in W.P.
Result: Petition Dismissed
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of declaration to declare the order passed by the 1st respondent in the proceedings Na KA No 345/Q2/2019 dated 15.06.2020, as null and void and consequently declare the lease deed dated 15.06.2020, registered as document no.1690/2020 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Acharapakkam, executed by the 1st respondent as per the proceedings dated 15.6.2020 as null and void and direct the respondents not to permit the 7th respondent in any manner carrying on quarry operations in survey nos.162/1 and 163, Perambakkam Village, Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalpet District.
W.P.Nos.17212 & 17215 of 2020: Writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the proceedings in Na Ka.No.6097/Minerals/2020 dated 19.09.2020 passed by the 5th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant approval of the layout as applied by the petitioner on 06.01.2020 and to call for the proceedings in Na Ka. No.87/2020/Se.Ma3 dated 19.09.2020 passed by the 4th respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant approval of the layout as applied by the petitioner on 06.01.2020.
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Madamus forbearing the respondents 1-6 from approving the layout formed by the 7th respondent and granting any planning permission to construct any building within 300 metres from the quarrying site situated in Perambakkam Village, Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalpet District, comprised in S.No.162/1 – 1.76.5 ares and S.No.163 – 1.43.0.ares without obtaining prior approval from the 7th respondent.)
1. The case on hand revolves upon the interpretation of Rule 36(1-A)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 which reads as follows:
...
(c) No new layout, building plans falling within 300 meters from any quarry should be given approval by any agency unless prior clearance of the Director of Geology and Mining is obtained. On receipt of proposals for according clearance, the Director of Geology and Mining shall decide upon the continuance or closure, as the case may be, of any quarry which is situated within 300 meters from the new layout, buildings sought for such clearance. Explanation.-[For the purpose of sub-rules (1) and (1-A)] –
(i) “public road” shall mean a road which has been constructed by artificially surfaced as distinct from a track resulting from repeated use;
(ii) “village road” shall mean and include any track shown in the revenue record as village road;
[(ii-a) 'stone' shall mean rough stones including khandas, boulders, size-reduced (broken or crushed) materials including metal jelly, ballasts, mill stones, hand chakais and building and road construction stones other than black, red, pink, grey, green, white or other coloured or multicoloured granites or any other rocks suitable for use as ornamental and decorative stones];
[(iii) 'inhabited site' shall mean a village site or town site or a house site as referred to in the revenue records or a house site or layout approved by a Local Body or Town or Country or Metropolitan Planning Authority, where the said Body or Authority is created under a statute and empowered to approve such an area as a house site or lay-out area.]
(a) W.P.No.11423 of 2020 has been filed by Mr. C. Kandasamy for a Mandamus to forbear the official respondents from granting approval of the layout in favour of Mrs. S. Lalitha.
(b) W.P.No.14928 of 2020 has been filed by Mrs. S. Lalitha to declare the order dated 15.06.2020 granting quarry lease to Mr. C. Kandasamy as null and void and consequently cancel the lease deed dated 15.06.2020 granted in his favour.
(c) W.P.No.17212 of 2020 has been filed by Mrs. S. Lalitha to quash the order dated 19.09.2020 passed by the Assistant Director, Geology and Mining, Chengalpet cancelling th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
