Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ANITA SUMANTH, N.SENTHILKUMAR
Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Rep By The Secretary To Government, Ministry Of Mines, Department Of Mines – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. intertwined facts and common issues in land acquisition. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. overview of legal proceedings and rights claimed. (Para 10 , 14 , 28) |
| 3. context of the mining applications and acquisitions. (Para 11 , 12 , 21) |
| 4. ruling on the maintainability of challenges to land acquisition. (Para 33 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
ANITA SUMANTH, J.
This common order disposes three Writ Appeals and four Writ Petitions, as the facts and circumstances involved, as well as the issues that arise for consideration, are intertwined and common.
2. The Writ Petitioner is the appellant and is hereinafter referred to as Dalmia, writ petitioner or appellant. W.P.Nos.5414 and 5466 of 2015 were filed by Dalmia seeking writs of Mandamus directing the State of Tamil Nadu to consider the petitioner’s applications for mining lease, both dated 12.02.1996, and grant lease in favour of 15.48.0 hectares in Periyanagalur and Kairulabad Villages in Ariyalur Taluk and 26.94.0 hectares in Ameenabad, Kairulabad and Kallankurichi Villages in Ariyalur Taluk, without insisting for any proposal from the District Collector.
3. The remaining two Writ Petitions, viz., W.P.No.11340 and 11341 of 2017 challenge show cause noti
The court emphasized that the power of the State to acquire land is independent and can only be challenged on substantial grounds. A mere application for a mining lease does not suffice to impede law....
Pre-determined issuance of demand notices violates legal principles requiring fair process, rendering them null and void.
The issuance of a mining lease without affording adequate opportunity for a hearing violates principles of natural justice.
Writ petitions can be maintained against show cause notices if they demonstrate pre-determined conclusions by the authority, constituting a legal mala fide exercise of power.
The court upheld that parties lacking legitimate claims or authority cannot disrupt lawful mining operations, affirming pre-existing rights granted under legislated provisions.
Statutory authorities must exercise powers independently, and actions based on predetermination or external influence are deemed illegal.
Writs under Article 226 can be maintained against predetermination by authorities, regardless of alternative remedies available, invalidating actions based on extraneous influences.
The court ruled that ownership disputes over land must be resolved in civil courts, not through administrative processes, emphasizing the illegality of the quarry lease granted without proper verific....
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
