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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 26310

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J
S.Naseera – Appellant
Versus
The Government of TamilNadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Industries Department – Respondent
WMP NO. 28016 & 24608 OF 2022



Advocates:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Sanjeevi
For Respondent(s): Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu, AGP

Demand notices for illegal mining without prior hearing violate natural justice; must be remanded for show cause and personal hearing.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged a demand notice issued by the District Collector for Rs.82,78,006/- alleging quarrying of granite without environmental clearance, under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court found violation of natural justice principles due to lack of prior opportunity. The notice was set aside and remanded for fresh consideration. Issue: Whether the demand notice issued without hearing violates natural justice. Ratio: Demand notices for mineral costs without opportunity contravene principles of natural justice, requiring show cause and hearing before finalization. Writ petition disposed of; notice set aside and remanded with directions for petitioner to reply and respondent to hear and decide within timelines.

Table of Content
1. demand notice for granite quarried without environmental clearance. (Para 2 , 6)
2. no prior hearing; treat as show cause notice. (Para 4)
3. violation of natural justice principles. (Para 5)
4. set aside notice, remand for fresh consideration with hearing. (Para 7 , 8)

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned demand notice dated 19.02.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the 3rd respondent had issued the impugned demand notice for a sum of Rs.82,78,006/- towards the cost of mineral alleging that the petitioner had quarried and removed the granite blocks without environmental clearance. 3. Further, he would contend that no opportunity was provided to the petitioner prior to the issuance of the said demand notice, which is a clear violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

4. In reply, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent had confirmed the above submissions and would request this Court to pass appropriate orders. Further, he would suggest this Court that the impugned demand notice may be treated as a show cause notice and the petitioner may be directed to file their reply, so as to enable the respondent to consider the same and dispose of the matter in accordance with law.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

6. In the case on hand, the 3rd respondent had issued the impugned demand notice for a sum of Rs.82,78,006/- towards the cost of mineral alleging that the petitioner had quarried and removed the granite blocks without environmental clearance.

7. Further, it was submitted that no sufficient opportunities were provided to the petitioner prior to the issuance of said demand notice. In such case, there is no doubt that the impugned demand notice was issued in violation of principles of natural justice and hence, the same is liable to be set aside.

Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-

(i) The impugned demand notice dated 19.02.2020 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration (ii) The petitioner is directed to consider the aforesaid demand notice dated 19.02.2020 as a show cause notice issued by the respondent and file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of filing of reply by the petitioner.

8. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

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