Madras High CourtWP/11807/2017dismissed as infructuous

M.Marathal v. The District Collector

2017-06-15Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.06.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU Writ Petition No.11807 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.12772 of 2017 1.M.Marathal 2.Thangammal 3.Rajammal ... Petitioners Vs.

1. The District Collector Tirupur, Collectorate - Tirupur

2. The Deputy Director, Geology and Mining, Tirupur District, Tirupur.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupur District, Tirupur.

4. The Tahsildar, Palladam Taluk,

5. Shri Praveen and Company, No.3/1, KPG Thottam, Trichy Main Road, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District, Rep. by its Managing Partner C.Rakkiappan

6. V.Subramani, S/o. late Vengidusamy, D.No. 57, Sothaiparai Thottam, Kothumuttipalayam, Ichipatti, Palladam Taluk, ... Respondents Prayer:

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to forbear from granting quarrying licence to the 5th respondent with respect to the land measuring Punjai acre 4.97 in Survey Numbers 153/1 and 153/2, Ichipatti Village, Palladam Taluk.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Sivasubramanian For Respondents : Mr.C.Jagadish Special Government Pleader For R1 to R4 Mr.K.Govi Ganesan learned counsel, for R5 R6 - Proof not filed

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed seeking for a Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 from granting quarrying licence to the fifth respondent in respect of the lands at Survey Nos. 153/1 and 153/2, Ichipatti Village, Palladam Taluk. After notice, the matter is taken up today for further hearing.

2. Mr. K.Govi Ganesh, learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent submitted that the prayer in this writ petition has become infructuous, in view of the fact that the quarrying licence was already issued in favour of the fifth respondent as early as on 12.12.2016, even before filing of this writ petition on 20.12.2016. Therefore, he submitted that nothing survives in this writ petition to be adjudicated upon. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the very grant of quarrying licence in favour of the fifth respondent is illegal.

3. It is needless to say that such contention cannot be considered in the present writ petition, unless the petitioner chooses to challenge the licence in the manner known to law. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous, without going into the merits of the matter, however, by granting liberty to the petitioner to agitate against the grant of licence before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No Costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mk /sm To

1. The District Collector Tirupur, Collectorate - Tirupur

2. The Deputy Director, Geology and Mining, Tirupur District, Tirupur.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupur District, Tirupur.

4. The Tahsildar, Palladam Taluk, +1cc to Mr.K.Govi Ganesan, Advocate, S.R.No.42551 +1cc to Mr.T.M.Hariharan, Advocate, S.R.No.42562 W.P.No.11807 of 2017 PPA(CO) CA(29/06/2017)