IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA, D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, JJ.
A. Radhakrishnan – Petitioner
Versus
The Vigilance Commissioner, Secretariat, Chennai and Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 27793 of 2021
Decided On : 07-03-2024
Illegal Quarrying - Environmental Protection - The court disposed of a petition seeking to prevent illegal quarrying operations in specific villages, noting that the authorities had taken steps to initiate penal proceedings against those involved in illegal quarrying and transportation, and directing government authorities to periodically carry out inspections to prevent further illegal mining/quarrying activity.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to prevent illegal quarrying operations in specific villages. The petitioner alleged that despite illegal quarrying activities, no action had been taken by the authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that steps had been taken by the authorities, including conducting field inspections, initiating penal proceedings, and filing First Information Reports against those involved in illegal quarrying. The court concluded that no further orders were necessary in the present writ petition.
Issues: Illegal quarrying operations, lack of action by authorities, and the need for preventive measures to avoid further illegal mining/quarrying activity.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of government authorities periodically carrying out inspections to prevent illegal mining/quarrying activity and taking immediate action in accordance with the law against those involved in illegal quarrying.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, with no order as to costs, and related applications were closed.
ORDER :
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to prevent the illegal quarrying operation in the properties of S.F. No. 12 at Jagadevenpatty Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District, in S.F. No. 1/1 and S.F. No. 115/1 at Karungaradu, Chettychavadi Village, and S.F. No. 1, Reddiyur Village, Salem West Taluk, Salem District and take appropriate action by following the G.O.Ms. No. 135 & 170 dated 13.11.2009 and 05.08.2020 respectively and consequently issue direction directing the 9th respondent to continue the probe in uninfluenced and biased manner and proceed in accordance with law as per the guideline issued in the above said Government Orders by considering representations dated 17.11.2016, 26.7.2021 and 31.10.2021.
1. We have heard Mr. R. Marudhachalamurthy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. A. Edwin Prabakar, learned State Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 6, 8 to 22; Mr. A. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 23; Mr. Karthik Lakshmanan, learned counsel for respondent No. 24; Mr. L. Mouli, learned counsel for respondent No. 25; Mr. H. Elango, learned counsel for respondent No. 26 and Mr. S. Jayaprakash, learned counsel for respondent No. 27.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that illegal quarrying operation has taken place in Jagadevenpatty Village; Karungaradu Chettychavadi Village and Reddiyur Village of Salem District. The details are given by the petitioner. However, no action has been taken.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 25 submits that no mining activity is carried out by respondent No. 25.
4. According to learned counsel for respondent No. 24, now the mining activity is stopped. A penalty has been imposed upon respondent No. 24 for excess quarrying. An appeal was filed and, in the appeal, the penalty was reduced and the reduced penalty was paid by respondent No. 24.
5. The Collector, Salem, has filed affidavit/status report. In the status report, it has been stated that a field inspection was conducted and report was submitted by the then Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Salem. Penal proceedings have been initiated against the persons involved in the illegal quarrying and transportation as per Rule 36(A) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. First Information Reports filed against the persons involved in the illegal quarrying have been detailed.
6. In view of the fact that steps have been taken by the authorities, no further orders are necessary in the present writ petition.
7. The government authorities shall periodically carry out inspection so as to avoid any illegal mining/quarrying activity and, if they notice the illegal quarrying/mining, then immediate action in accordance with law shall be taken against the erring persons.
8. The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P. Nos. 29362 of 2021 and 12536 of 2022 are closed.
AI
A writ of mandamus can direct authorities to act against illegal activities affecting land and water resources.
Court directs authorities to impose penalties and prevent illegal mining, including night hours, under mining laws.
Writ petition disposed after authorities considered representation, halted quarrying, and initiated violation inquiry.
The court directed timely consideration of the petitioner's representation regarding quarrying rights.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.