R.Sekar v. M/S.Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., And 4 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.06.2024

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI R.Sekar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.M/s.Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., (Unit: Reddy palayam cement works) Represented by its Vice President, Mr.T.P.Janardanan, Reddy Palayam (Post), Ariyalur District - 621 704.

2.Mr.V.Rajaraman, IAS, Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Tamilnadu Government, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

3.Mr.K.S.Palanisamy, IAS, The Special Commissioner/ Commissioner Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

4.Tmt.J.Anne Mary Swarna, IAS, The District Collector, Ariyalur District, Jayakondam Road, Ariyalur - 621 704.

1/4

5.Mr.Anandavel The Thasildar, Ariyalur Taluk, Ariyalur - 621 704.

... Respondents Prayer :

Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willful disobedience of the order in W.P.No.21720 of 2012 dated 21.12.2022.

For Petitioner : M/s.S.Ganesan For Respondent : Mr.V.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

This contempt petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 21.12.2022 made in W.P.No.21720 of 2012. 2.The subject property was leased out to the first respondent/ writ petitioner by the second respondent for setting up of a cement company. According to the writ petitioner, the classification of the land was shown as 'Government Poromboke' though identified in the revenue records as 'water body'. Though it is classified as water body, in reality, the lands have lost its characteristics as a water body and hence, pursuant to the lease, the writ petitioner requested the Government to alienate the lands in their favour, however, the 2/4

lease granted to the first respondent/ writ petitioner was cancelled. Challenging the same, the first respondent filed the writ petition. The petitioner herein is the fifth respondent in the writ petition. Since the subject property is not maintained as a water body, the petitioner has filed this contempt petition.

3.This Court vide order dated 21.12.2022 made in W.P.No.21720 of 2012 did not issue any direction to the Government to maintain the classification of the land as a water body. If at all the petitioner want to maintain the classification of the land as a water body, the petitioner has to make a separate representation to the Government. Hence contempt does not arise.

4.In view of the above, this Contempt Petition is closed. 07.06.2024 pri Index: Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No NCC: Yes/No 3/4

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pri Contempt Petition No.1482 of 2024 07.06.2024 4/4