Review Application No.25 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10-04-2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

Review Application No.25 of 2022

And

WMP No.5340 of 2022

M/s.Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.,

Dalmiapuram,

Tiruchirapalli District

Represented by its Dy. General Manager (Accounts)

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu,

Represented by its Secretary to Government,

Industrial Department,

Fort St. George,

Chennai-600 009.

2.Director of Geology and Mining,

Guindy,

Chennai-600 032.

3.District Collector,

Tiruchirapalli.

4.District Collector,

Ariyalur.

... Respondents

Page 1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Review Application No.25 of 2022

Prayer: The Review Application is preferred under Section 114 of CPC

read with Order XLVII Rules 1 and 2 of CPC against the judgment dated

21.01.2022 passed by this Court in WP No.12033 of 2002.

For Petitioner

: Mr.P.R.Raman,

Senior Counsel for

Mr.C.Seethapathy.

For Respondents

: Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram,

Advocate General Assisted by

Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan,

Government Advocate.

O R D E R

The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the review

petitioner mainly contended that during the course of arguments in the writ

petition, the learned Advocate General made a submission that the

impugned demand notice in the writ petition shall be construed as show

cause notice, enabling the aggrieved petitioner to submit their defence

statements. However, that has not been recorded by this Court. Therefore,

the petitioner is constrained to move the present Review Application.

Page 2 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Review Application No.25 of 2022

2. Even assuming that such submissions were made by the

learned Advocate General during the course of arguments, all such

submissions were elaborately considered by this Court and more-so, this

Court drew a distinction between the 'demand notice' and 'show cause

notice' and the nature of the 'demand notice' issued to the writ petitioner by

the Department for the purpose of recovering the royalty. Certain 'demand

notices' cannot be construed as 'show cause notices' and this aspect has been

elaborately considered by this Court and final order has been passed.

3. That being the factum, the said ground need not be

considered for the purpose of entertaining the present Review Application.

The scope of review cannot be expanded for the purpose of adjudicating the

issues, which were already adjudicated by this Court. Thus, this Court is not

inclined to entertain the present Review Application.

4. Accordingly, the present Review Application stands

dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the

Page 3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Review Application No.25 of 2022

connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

10-04-2023

Index : Yes/No

Internet: Yes/No

Speaking order/Non-Speaking order

Neutral Citation : Yes/No

Svn

Page 4 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Review Application No.25 of 2022

To

1.The Secretary to Government,

State of Tamil Nadu,State of Tamil Nadu,

Industrial Department,

Fort St. George,

Chennai-600 009.

2.Director of Geology and Mining,

Guindy,

Chennai-600 032.

3.District Collector,

Tiruchirapalli.

4.District Collector,

Ariyalur.

Page 5 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Review Application No.25 of 2022

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Svn

Rev.Application 25 of 2022

10-04-2023

Page 6 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis