SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 24115

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
K.T.CHENTHAMARA – Appellant
Versus
THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT – Respondent
W.P.No.38460 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.41648 of 2024



Advocates:
Mr.V.Raghavachari Senior Counsel for Ms.V.Srimathy, Mr.Stalin Abimanyu Additional Government Pleader for RR1 to 5

The court upheld the Government's authority to impose penalties for illegal mining, emphasizing strict adherence to mining regulations and the recovery of full compensation for illegally mined minerals.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 - Rule 40 - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - Sections 21 and 23 - Writ petition challenging Government Order regarding illegal mining and penalties imposed - Petitioner alleged violation of natural justice in penalty assessment for illegal quarrying activities - Court upheld the Government Order, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to mining regulations and the recovery of full compensation for illegally mined minerals. (Paras 5.1, 5.2, 10.1, 11.6)

(B) Natural Justice - Principles of natural justice must be adhered to in administrative actions, but violations may not invalidate actions if proper procedures are followed. (Paras 11.1, 11.2)

(C) Environmental Protection - Mining activities must comply with environmental regulations to protect natural resources. (Paras 10.1, 10.2)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, representing a mining company, challenged a Government Order imposing a penalty for illegal mining activities, asserting that the order violated principles of natural justice. The petitioner had previously been penalized for unauthorized quarrying and had paid a significant portion of the imposed fines.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner had engaged in extensive illegal mining and upheld the Government's decision to impose penalties and initiate prosecution against the petitioner.

Issues: The main issues included whether the Government Order violated principles of natural justice and the legality of the penalties imposed for illegal mining.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Government had the authority to impose penalties for illegal mining and that the principles of natural justice were upheld through the process, despite the petitioner's claims.

Result: Writ Petition dismissed; Government Order upheld.

ORDER

A.The Writ Petition:

This writ petition challenges the Government Order in G.O.(D).No.102, Natural Resources (MMC.1) Department dated 29.10.2024.

B. The Case of the Petitioner:

2. The petitioner herein represents M/s. YENCEES Blue Metals(P) Ltd, as its Managing Director. The petitioner company applied for separate quarry quarry licenses regarding its patta lands and was granted for the periods including renewals as follows:

(i) S.No.495/2A to an extent of 2.43.0 hectares, 5 years from 27/02/2009 to 26/02/2014 and renewed from 02/06/2014 upto 01/06/2019;

(ii) S.No.504/2A and 504/2B to an extent of 1.75.0 hectares, 5 years from 06/04/2010 to 05/04/2010 and renewed from 04/02/2016 to 03/02/2021;

(iii) and S. No. 503/1A, 503/1B, 503/2 (Part) to an extent of 2.27.0 hectares, 5 years from 22/12/2018 to 21/12/2023.

2.1. Meanwhile, one Radhakrishnan, who is involved in the real estate business around the village of Puravipalayam, has made frivolous claims and demanded money from the petitioner. The petitioner has also lodged complaints against this individual with the Respondents on various occasions. In an earlier Writ Petition, WP.No.17367/2020, filed by Radhakrishnan to direct the respondents to take appropriate action regarding illegal mining at Quarry-3 owned by the petitioner, the court ordered an inspection and the submission of a status report on the quarry site. Pursuant to the court’s order, the Commissioner of Geology and Mining formed a Joint Committee to conduct an on-site inspection. Inspection was conducted from 6th to 8th of March, 2021. Only minor violations were noticed and a report was filed. Considering the report that was filed, the W.P. No. 17367 of 2020 was closed as having become infructuous.

2.2. Upon receipt of the report, the Sub-Collector, the 4th respondent herein, levied a penalty of Rs. 32,29,77,792/- on 29.01.2022 without notice to the petitioner company for illegal mining and transportation of minerals from the leased property. In response to this order, the petitioner filed an appeal on 24.11.2022 before the 2nd respondent, namely, the Commissioner of the Department of Geology and Mining, to revise the order dated 29.01.2022. Meanwhile, the petitioner filed a writ petition against the order of the 4th Respondent in W.P. No.23470/2022 for a stay of the operation, and the Court granted an interim stay on 02.09.2022. While disposing of the appeal, the 2nd respondent, on 25.11.2022, passed orders affording the petitioner an opportunity for a hearing and, based on the report, concluded that the petitioner, while conducting mining operations, had removed and transported rough stones without a valid transport permit. Consequently, the 2nd respondent imposed costs on the petitioner under several categories, totaling Rs.2,48,09,119/-. The Joint Committee also inspected another quarry, which had previously been quarried by the petitioner, and concluded that rough stone was removed and transported without valid permits. However, they also confirmed that no quarrying was currently taking place in the said area.

2.3 The 2nd respondent issued an order dated 25.11.2022 to set aside the order of the 4th respondent, namely, the Sub-Collector. The order directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.25 Lakhs immediately and the remaining amount in instalments of Rs. 8,00,000/- every month within the expiry of the existing lease period, i.e., 30.06.2025.

2.4. Pursuant to the aforementioned order, the petitioner submitted a revised mining plan. This was approved by the Deputy Director of Geology and Mining, Tirupur, through an order dated 10.02.2023, and the lessee was directed to obtain Environmental Clearance from SEIAA-TN. Additionally, it was advised that consent be obtained from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board through the proceedings R.C.No.394/Mines/2019 dated 10.02.2023. Furthermore, a supplementary lease deed was executed on 24.05.2023, extending the lease period until 30.06.2025. The approved revised mining plan d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top