JUDGMENT :

B. Pugalendhi, J.

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to prevent illegal quarrying of sand mining from Thamirabarani River near Agaram Kudiyuruppu, Vallanadu Village, Srivaigundam Taluk, Thoothukudi District, by the sixth respondent and initiate action against the sixth respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.09.2020.)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, as a public interest litigation, for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to prevent illegal quarrying of sand from river Thamirabarani near Agaram Kudiyuruppu, Vallanadu Village, Srivaigundam Taluk, Tuticorin District by the sixth respondent and for taking appropriate action as against the sixth respondent.

2. The Government, considering the need to raise the water table, decided to construct a Check Dam across river Thamirabarani near Agaram Kudiyuruppu in Vallanadu Village of Srivaigundam Taluk. The contract for construction was awarded to the sixth respondent in the year 2019 and the Contractor was permitted to use the sand, which is available nearby the site, for the construction work by way of a special condition no.4. The petitioner's case is that this special condition no.4 is not available in the original agreement dated 15.02.2019 and it has been created and inserted after the complaint lodged by him.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that by taking advantage of the contract for constructing the Check Dam in river Thamirabarani, the sixth respondent has extracted huge quantity of river sand and illegally transported the same. One such consignment was seized by the Murappanadu Police on 23.09.2020, wherein, four Tipper Lorries belonging to the sixth respondent were seized by the police and a case in Crime No.341 of 2020 was registered for the offence under Sections 379 IPC r/w 21(1) of Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, against four named accused. Though the case has been registered and lorries were seized, there is no proper investigation and therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. The sixth respondent entered appearance through a Counsel and filed his counter affidavit that he is one of the reputed Class I Contractors in the State, received several awards. He has constructed several Government Buildings, including Court Buildings, apart from various other works.

5. Learned Counsel for the sixth respondent submitted that this writ petition is not filed on public interest, but on personal interest. The writ petition has been used as a tool by his business rivals to stall the project. If the call details of the petitioner is verified, the same would be exposed. He further submitted that the proposed Check Dam would benefit the petitioner's village and the surrounding villages, however, at the instance of his business rivals, this writ petition is filed.

6. In fact, on the hue and cry raised by the petitioner that he was intimidated to withdraw the writ petition and that he is apprehending danger to his life for having filed the writ petition, this Court has taken up the matter and has taken cognizance on certain materials placed before it. An order was also passed on 11.11.2020, directing the Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District, to provide police protection to the petitioner. Even then, the petitioner was not provided with police protection and subsequently, further orders were passed by this Court to provide police protection to the petitioner.

7. As per the special condition no.4 of the contract, the sixth respondent/Contractor was permitted to take the sand available near the site and to use the same for the construction of the Dam. The petitioner has filed a document obtained under the Right to Information Act that it is the original agreement o