Back
G. R. SWAMINATHAN, M. DHANDAPANI, K. MURALI SHANKAR
S. Kumar – Appellant
Versus
District Collector Kokkirakulam Tirunelveli – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition for mandamus regarding business operations. (Para 1) |
| 2. environmental damage due to illegal mining prompts legal framework. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. writ petition seeks return of seized vehicles following regulations. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 4. clarification petition sought due to empowerment conflicts. (Para 7) |
| 5. discrepancy about authorized officer for vehicle seizure. (Para 12) |
| 6. police's authorisation and role in certifying compliance with legal provisions. (Para 19 , 20 , 22) |
| 7. court emphasizes role of police in environmental law enforcement. (Para 60) |
| 8. joint consideration of offences under both ipc and mmdr act is necessary. (Para 72 , 86) |
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court for issuance of mandamus, to direct the respondents, more particularly the first respondent permitting the petitioner to continue his business of crusher operation in the property bearing Survey Nos.844, 848 and 849/2 in the name of Venkateswara Crusher at Door No.815 Adamithipankuam, Tharuvai Village, Palayamkottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District and further direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to permit the petitioner to tak
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
