Rule 36-D of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concessions Rules pertains only to contractual agreement disputes and does not grant the Commissioner jurisdiction to review or modify penalties imposed by subordinate authorities for illegal mining, as such matters are governed by the statutory appeal process under Rule 36-C.

ORDER :

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

The petitioner, a rough stone quarry operator, has filed this writ petition to quash the Government Order in G.O.(2D).No.18, Natural Resources (MMC.1) Department, dated 22.08.2025. The Government vide the impugned order has taken a suo motu revision on the proceedings of the Commissioner of Geology and Mining in RC.No.7153/MM6/2022, dated 05.12.2022.

2.The petitioner has been granted rough stone and gravel quarrying lease in SF No.375, Palamadai Village (4.89.5 hectares) for a period of 5 years on 25.08.2020 by the Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Tirunelveli. It appears that an accident had occurred in a rough stone quarry in Tirunelveli district, where several persons died. Therefore, as per the proceedings of the Director of Geology and Mining dated 18.05.2022, a Special Team conducted inspection at the quarries in Tirunelveli District. The team consisting of the Joint Director (Mines) Kanyakumari District, the Assistant Director (Mines), Dharmapuri, the Assistant Geologist, Theni, Tasildar, Tirunelveli and the Deputy Thasildar, Tirunelveli, inspected the petitioner's quarry site on 27.05.2022 and submitted a report on 07.06.2022 that this petitioner has illegally quarried and transported 5,045 cbm gravel sand and 2,71,974 cbm rough stone beyond the permitted limit from the leasehold area and therefore, necessary action has to be taken as against the petitioner / lessee for the violation of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concessions Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli conducted an enquiry based on the report of the Special Team, by issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner and imposed a penalty of Rs.13,65,83,222/- as the cost of the minerals, seigniorage fee and one time seigniorage fee under Rule 36 (A)(1) of the Rules. As against this penalty order dated 18.10.2022, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner and the same was entertained by the Commissioner of Geology and Mining Department in RC.No.7153/MM6/2022 and the Commissioner by his initial proceedings dated 12.11.2022 modified the penalty as Rs.1,99,55,539/- by deleting the cost of minerals imposed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The Commissioner by his order dated 12.11.2022 also permitted the petitioner to continue the quarry operation and has also extended the lease for a period of 5 months citing the non- operation of the quarry from 15.05.2022 to 20.09.2022. The petitioner instead of preferring an appeal as specified in the proceedings of the Commissioner has submitted a representation to the Commissioner on 02.12.2022 based on which the revised order dated 05.12.2022 has been passed by the Commissioner deleting the quantity of gravel and modifying the quantum of rough stone as 1,82,057 cbm instead of 2,71,974 cbm and has modified the penalty amount as Rs.1,33,89,635/- instead of Rs.1,99,55,539/-. The petitioner has not challenged any of the orders passed by the Commissioner dated 12.11.2022 and 05.12.2022. However, the Government has taken up suo motu revision of the orders of the Commissioner, Geology and Mining Department under Rule 40 of the Rules, issued show cause notice to the petitioner and set aside the proceedings of the Commissioner dated 05.12.2022, vide the impugned government order dated 22.08.2025. While setting aside the order passed by the Com