SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2239

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. Suresh Kumar, J.
C.R. Asai Murugan – Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector, Madurai & Others – Respondents
W.P. (MD) No. 3338 of 2019 & WM.P (MD). No. 2620 of 2019
Decided On : 06-09-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:J. Lawrance, Advocate.
For the Respondent:D. Ghandiraj, Government Advocate, V.P. Rajan, C. Guhaseelarupan, M. Vivek Kumar, Advocates.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Gravel sand - Illegal quarrying - Private respondents are indulging in illegal quarrying by taking gravel sand from said lands mentioned in aforesaid Survey numbers belonged to private respondents, which are just adjacent to the land belonged to petitioner, petitioner is getting affected, in order to prevent private respondents from doing alleged illegal quarrying, petitioner had given a representation to respondents on however, since same is not considered, the petitioner has approached Court by filing present writ petition - Learned Government Advocate appearing for official respondents, who would submit that, if at all, any representation has been submitted by petitioner as claimed by him, on a copy of same can be forwarded to first respondent, who, on receipt of same, would conduct a limited enquiry, as to verify veracity of complaint made by petitioner in said representation with regard to alleged illegal quarrying on part of private respondents, ofcourse, by giving an opportunity or notice to both petitioner and private respondents – Held, there shall be a direction to first respondent/District Collector to consider representation of petitioner, dated and decide same after conducting a limited enquiry, as to veracity of the complaint made by petitioner in said representation, by giving notice separately to both petitioner as well as private respondents and final order shall be passed by disposing said representation of petitioner dated - Needful as indicated above shall be undertaken by first respondent within a period of twelve weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order - It is made clear that petitioner shall give a copy of representation, dated along with a copy of this order and forward the same to first respondent/District Collector and on receipt of same, first respondent shall do needful as indicated above, within time stipulated - Writ petition is disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to restrain the Respondents 4 to 8 herein from in any manner removing the gravel sand illegally from the landed properties comprised in Survey Nos.119/3A, 119/3B, 120/8, 140/14, 141/10, 141/2, 141/3, 141/4 and 141/5 situated at Nakkalapatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.)

1. Prayer sought for in this writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents No.1 to 3 to restrain the Respondents 4 to 8 herein, from in any manner removing the gravel sand illegally from the landed properties comprised in Survey Nos.119/3A, 119/3B, 120/8, 140/14, 141/10, 141/2, 141/3, 141/4 and 141/5 situated at Nakkalapatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is having agricultural lands in Survey Nos.119/2A, 120/7, 141/2B, 141/2B1C, 141/2B1D and 141/5 at Nakkalapatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

3. It is a further case of the petitioner that the private respondents herein are having lands at various survey numbers in S.Nos.119/2A, 119/3A, 119/3B, 120/7, 120/8, 141/2B 1C, 141/2B 1D, 140/14, 141/10, 141/2, 141/3, 141/4 and 141/5.

4. It is in this context, the further case of the petitioner is that the private respondents are indulging in illegal quarrying by taking gravel sand from the said lands mentioned in the aforesaid Survey numbers belonged to the private respondents, which are just adjacent to the land belonged to the petitioner, thereby, the petitioner is getting affected, therefore, in order to prevent the private respondents from doing the alleged illegal quarrying, the petitioner had given a representation to the respondents on 07.02.2019, however, since the same is not considered, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

5. Heard Mr.J.Lawrence, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, who having stated the aforesaid, would seek indulgence of this Court to issue a direction to the respondents, especially, the first respondent, to decide the representation of the petitioner, on merits, within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

6. Heard Mr.D.Ghandiraj, learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents, who would submit that, if at all, any representation has been submitted by the petitioner as claimed by him, on 07.02.2019, a copy of the same can be forwarded to the first respondent, who, on receipt of the same, would conduct a limited enquiry, as to verify the veracity of the complaint made by the petitioner in the said representation with regard to the alleged illegal quarrying on the part of the private respondents, ofcourse, by giving an opportunity or notice to both the petitioner and the private respondents, and thereafter, decide the same and dispose the said representation within a time frame on merits, that may be stipulated by this Court.

7. Considering the said submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and on perusal of the documents referred to above including the representation of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following order:

“that there shall be a direction to the first respondent/District Collector to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 07.02.2019, and decide the same after conducting a limited enquiry, as to the veracity of the complaint made by the petitioner in the said representation, by giving notice separately to both the petitioner as well as the private respondents, and thereafter, final order shall be passed by disposing the said representation of the petitioner dated 07.02.2019. The needful as indicated above shall be undertaken by the first respondent within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall give a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top