Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
T.S. Sivagnanam, S.Ananthi, JJ.
B.Raman - Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector Madurai, Madurai District and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(MD) Nos.7402, 9406 & 10113 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.6854, 9007, 9103, 10157 & 10187 of 2020
Decided On : 06-05-2021
Tamil nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 - Rule 36-A - Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 - Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 - Government poromboke land – Encroached land – Penalty - Carrying on quarrying operations -Renewal or for extension of lease or for fresh lease - Stone quarry and stone crusher unit located in lands comprised in same survey numbers – Seeking direction to District Collector to allot alternate site for Government poromboke land, which is classified as “Kalam” for agricultural purpose in Village - Whether petitioner is entitled to carry on operations of stone crushing unit - Case of petitioner is that he is not concerned about rough stone quarry, but he is running a stone crushing unit, which should be permitted to function and the District Collector has rightly granted permission by order and unjustified objections have been raised by petitioner – Raman and others in area and these objections/obstructions need to be dealt with in accordance with law and therefore, Police protection should be afforded to him to enable him to carry on stone crushing activities - Held, Court find that action initiated for illicit quarrying has not proceeded in required pace and there appears to be some slackness on the part of the officials in progressively and quickly taking entire matter to logical end, bringing to books persons, who have violated rules, recovering penalty and if necessary, launching of prosecution. It is not clear as to why officials are dragging on matter for this long - Theory of operating stone crushing unit by outsourcing material is mentioned for the first time, when writ petitions were heard. Therefore, statement appears to be not geniune nor established in manner known to law - In any event, Murugesan is not entitled to renewal or for fresh grant or for matter no fresh lease or permission can be granted in respect of subject lands, because proceedings initiated for illicit quarrying are yet to attain finality. Therefore, even assuming that the land owner Pari enters into an agreement with any third party for grant of permission to quarry in the subject land, such application cannot be entertained because the entire area in which illicit quarrying operations had taken place cannot be permitted to be restarted by either the land owner or a third party because there is already proceedings incitiated for illicit quarrying – W.P.(MD) No.10113 of 2020 and 7402 of 2020 allowed and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.6854, 9007, 9103, 10157 & 10187 of 2020 dismissed.
ORDER :
T.S.SIVAGNANAM , J.
Since the subject matter in all these writ petitions pertains to a stone quarry and stone crusher unit located in lands comprised in the same survey numbers, these writ petitions were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioner in W.P.(MD) Nos.7402 of 2020 and 10113 of 2020 is one B.Raman, son of Balaguruvan. The prayer in W.P.(MD) No.7402 of 2020, filed as a public interest litigation, is for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the official respondents 1 to 5 therein to take action, against the sixth respondent Pari, son of Gopalasamy/petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9406 of 2020 and the seventh respondent, namely, K.Murugesan, son of Kandasamy and M/s.Gopalsamy Blue Metals for having illegally quarried in the lands comprised in Survey Nos.22/1A, 22/1B, 23/1, 23/3A, 23/3B, 23/4B, 23/5B1, 23/5B2, 23/6, to an extent of more than 200 feet in depth and also illegally quarried in poromboke lands comprised in Survey No.23/2 of Karuvelampatti Village, Tiruparankundram Talum, Madurai District, to an extent of 90 cents and for a consequential direction to reclaim the lands, which have been encroached and to impose penalty for quarrying in Government poromboke lands by invoking the powers under Rule 36-A of Tamilnadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 (in short, “the Rules”) and consequently, to direct the District Collector, Madurai, to allot alternate site for Government poromboke land, which is classified as “Kalam” for agricultural purpose in Karuvelampatti Village.
3. The prayer in W.P.(MD) No.10113 of 2020 is for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order, dated 27.07.2020, passed by the District Collector, Madurai District, permitting the continued operation of the stone crusher unit/s under the name and style of M/s.Gopalsamy Blue Metals, being run by the sixth respondent herein, namely, Pari, son of Gopalsamy/petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.9406 of 2020.
4. The said Pari, son of Gopalsamy, has filed W.P.(MD) No.9406 of 2020 praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus to afford police protection to him for carrying on the stone crusher unit under the name and style of M/s.Gopalsamy Blue Metals, as per the permission granted by the District Collector, Madurai District, dated 27.07.2020, which proceedings is impugned in W.P.(MD) No.10113 of 2020.
5. Heard Mr.J.Jeyakumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner – B.Raman; Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr.Babu Rajendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner – Pari; Mr.K.P.Krishnadass, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the official respondents and Mr.S.Bageerathan, learned counsel appearing for the District Environment Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Madurai.
6. First we take up W.P.(MD) No.10113 of 2020 for consideration. The said writ petition has been filed as a public interest litigation to quash the order passed by the District Collector, Madurai District, dated 27.07.2020, by which the stone crusher unit operated by Pari under the name and style of M/s.Gopalsamy Blue Metals was permitted to carry on its operations.
7. It is submitted that there are nearly 3000 families residing in Karuvelampatti, Chokkanathapatti and Koothiyarkundu Villages and they are entirely depending upon agricultural operations. While so, the said Pari obtained licence to run a stone crusher unit in Survey Nos.22/1A, 22/1B, 23/1, 23/3A, 23/3B, 23/4B, 23/5B1, 23/5B2, 23/6, measuring an extent of nearly 3.68.5 Hectares (9.09 Acres) of Patta land owned by Pari and also that he had encroached nearly an extent of 90 Cents of Government poromboke land in Survey No.23/2 and carried on illegal quarry operations.
8. Further, it is submitted that a compound wall has been erected to a height of about 20 Feet and on account of illegal quarrying operations carried on in the Government poromboke land, agricultural activities were completely affected and the stone crushing unit establ
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
