Madras High CourtWP/34984/2025disposed of

Mathiyazhagan v. The District Collector

2025-09-23Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr.Justice G.Arul Murugan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.09.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN Mathiyazhagan ..

Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Collectorate Office Villupuram District - 605 602.

2. The Superintendent of Police Villupuram District - 605 602.

3. The District Environmental Engineer District Pollution Control Board Villupuram District - 605 602.

4. The Executive Engineer Public Works Department

5. The Assistant Director Tamil Nadu Minerals Limited (TAMIN)

6. The Tahsildar Vanur Taluk

7. Gravity Blue Metals Rep. by its Partner T.Pradeep Blue Metal Quarry, Sirunavoor Village ..

Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 6 to consider the representation dated 05.05.2025 and to remove the encroachment made by the 7th respondent and protect the lake shore within a time frame.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Kumar For Respondents :

Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate for R1, R4 to R6 Mr.R.Munyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor for R2 Mr.V.Gunasekar Standing Counsel for R3

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) In response to the allegation made in the petition that seventh respondent, in the course of its quarrying operation and transportation, is illegally using the lake shore (tank bund) for the purpose of transportation of mineral lorries, an affidavit has been

filed before this Court, which clearly shows that use of the mud road is not permissible and a different road has been prescribed for the purpose of transportation of minerals.

2. It is further submitted that seventh respondent has been issued notice also and prohibited from using the mud road for the purpose of transportation of mineral lorries.

3. It will be the responsibility of fourth respondent and its officials to ensure that the mud road is not allowed for operating mineral lorries. If, in future, it is found that despite the order of this Court, seventh respondent is allowed to illegally operate the mineral lorries in mud road, appropriate action will be taken against the officials and private respondents.

4. Petition is disposed. There shall be no order as to costs. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 23.09.2025 Index :

Yes/No

Yes/No kpl To