IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.04.2024 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.11841 of 2021 Saxavos Enterprises, Represented by its Managing Partner, Babu K.Lona, Office at Door No. XXII/693, Thekkemadathil, Koonamave House, Manthamkolly, Pazhupathoor Post, Sulthan Bathery, Waynad – 673 592, State of Kerala. ...Petitioner -Vs-

1. The District Collector, Dharampuri, Dharampuri District.

2. The Assistant Director of Mining, Dharampuri, Dharmapuri District.

3. The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.

4. G.Sekhar ...Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to terminate the mining license granted to the fourth respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 10.02.2021, within a stipulated period.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Tamilavel For R1 and R2 : Mr.E.Vijay Anand Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mrs.Shanmugavalli Sekar For R4 : Mr.R.Prabudoss

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to terminate the mining license granted to the fourth respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 10.02.2021, within a stipulated period.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner had entered into an agreement with one Sradha Sekhar to do mines and mineral business. At the time of entering lease agreement, crushing unit was not functioning and the same was in sick. It was clearly stated in the agreement, that renewing their licenses, making both the mining and crushing unit functional and sharing an equal profit from its returns for tenure of 5 years. Based on the said agreement, for quarrying and carrying minor mineral entered between the first respondent and the Sradha Sekhar by the proceedings dated 20.07.2018 granted lease agreement for a period of five years for removal of rough stone in patta lands situated at Kalappamahalli Village, Karimangalam Taluk. The petitioner had invested huge money, manpower, machinery, technology and numerous intangible assets to develop and increase the efficiency of the business. While being so, on 24.04.2019, the said Sradha Sekhar expired and the successor and legal heir of the deceased/ fourth respondent herein executed a supplementary agreement to continue quarry operation for remaining period. Accordingly, the supplementary lease agreement has been entered into between the first and fourth respondents dated 17.07.2019 for a period from 08.03.2019 to 07.03.2024. However, now, the fourth respondent, without obtaining any permission from the first respondent, leased out mining quarry and crushing unit and No Objection Certificate was not obtained from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.

4. A perusal of the counter filed by the fourth respondent revealed that the petitioner had entered into an agreement dated 25.04.2018 for the purpose of maintaining and to carry out the repair works on the machineries in the crushing unit. The said agreement does not mean any sub-let or sub-lease. Further, the fourth respondent refused the petitioner firm to continue and maintain and to carry out the repair works in the crushing unit. Therefore, now, the petitioner submitted a representation to terminate the mining license granted to the fourth respondent. Clause

10 of the terms and conditions of the agreement revealed as follows:-

“ 10. In case of any disputes within the parties both of them specifically agree that in reference to all matters of dispute in relation to the this agreement shall be mutually resolved and if it is not possible then the Local Civil Courts shall have jurisdiction.”

5. Therefore, in dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent, the petitioner has to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief. That apart, a perusal