Impugned order quashed for non-consideration of reply; remanded for inquiry on excess quarrying post-environmental clearance.

ORDER

This petition has been filed challenging the impugned order of the first respondent dated 18.09.2024 and seeking to quash the same.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the Government of Tamil Nadu, vide G.O. (3D) No.10 Industries (MME-II) Department dated 18.02.2008, granted a quarry lease in favour of the petitioner for quarrying black granite over an extent of 2.39.5 hectares of land situated in Edakkal Village, Chengam Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District for a period of 20 years. Through the orders dated 29.10.2025, 27.01.2016, 13.05.2016 and 14.07.2016, the time limit for submission of the Environmental Clearance Certificate was extended upto 630 days. The petitioner obtained the Environmental Clearance on 06.07.2016. Since the respondents refused to issue despatch permits, the petitioner filed W.P No.7536 of 2019 to consider the application dated 24.10.2018 for issuance of despatch/transport permits and the same was disposed of by order dated 21.06.2019 directing the 2^nd respondent to process the petitioner’s application. The first respondent District Collector, issued a notice dated 09.07.2019, demanding a sum of Rs.99,53,248/- towards the cost and penalty of the mineral being 141.628 cubic meters of black granite which were transported during the period from 15.01.2016 to 05.07.2016. Challenging the said notice, the petitioner filed W.P No.27182 of 2020 before this Court. The 2^nd respondent rejected the application for approval of 2^nd scheme of mining through order dated 15.-07.2019 and against which, the petitioner filed W.P No.27183 of 2020 before this Court and both the petitions were dismissed by this Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred W.A.No.290 & 291 of 2021 before this Court and the same were disposed of on 17.10.2023 directing the petitioner to submit its reply to the respondents in respect of demand notice dated 09.07.2019. During the pendency of the writ appeals, the 2^nd respondent granted approval for the 3^rd scheme of mining. On 12.01.2024, the petitioner submitted its reply to the 1^st respondent. Without considering its reply, the first respondent District Collector, Thiruvannamalai passed the impugned order dated 18.09.2024, reiterating the earlier demand. Since the petitioner obtained Environment Certificate on 06.07.2016 prior to 630 days i.e before 10.01.2017, the impugned order reflects non-application of mind and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, he prayed for appropriate orders.

3.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would fairly submit that this Court may set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the first respondent / District Collector for fresh consideration.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials on record.

5.Considering the submissions mad by both sides, the impugned order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the first respondent is set aside, and the matter is remanded back to the third respondent for fresh consideration, limited solely to ascertaining whether any excess quarrying was carried out during the lease period. The third respondent shall conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 01-04-2026 Index: Yes/No (4/4)