S.Dharmaraj v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P.(MD)No.2541 of 2025 S.Dharmaraj
...Petitioner
-Vs1.The District Collector, 2.The Sub Collector, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli.
3.The Thasildar, Ambasamudram Taluk Office, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli.
4.The Commissioner, Department of Geology and Mining, Guindy, Chennai - 600032.
5.The Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mining, Collectorate, Tirunelveli District.
1/5
6.The District Environment Engineer, Tamilnadu Pollution Control Board, 30/2, Sidco Industrial Estate, Pettai, Tirunelveli District - 627010.
7.The President, Idaikal Panchayat, 8.The Thangalathil Granite Industries, No. 13/348, Little Flower, Kanakode, Vattappara (Post), Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala - 695028.
...Respondents
PRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 6 to take an action against the Respondents 7 and 8 with respect of the complaints dated 12/06/2024 and 20/06/2024, for the fabrication of false Documents and submit before the Government Authorities to intent to cheat the Government and the report of action should be filed before this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.H.Gangaraj For R1 to R5 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader For R8 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.) This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 6 to take an action against the Respondents 7 and 8 for fabricating false Documents to obtain quarry licence.
2/5
2.The contention of the petitioner is that the eighth respondent is running the quarry throughout the day and night causing disturbance to the public in the petitioner's Village. Due to the same, the ground water went drastically down and there were noise pollution by blasting bomb and running crusher unit and also continuous transportation. In this regard, the village people conducted protest and also made a complaint before the first respondent. In the meantime, the eighth respondent submitted an application seeking new quarry licence in Survey Nos.478 and 483 of Idaikal Village-2. By Suppressing all the objections raised by the village people, the eighth respondent managed to obtain no objection certificate from the seventh respondent and submitted the same along with his application before the authorities concerned.
Hence, the petitioner seeks to take action against the seventh and eighth respondents. 3.The learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, on instructions submits that the application of the eighth respondent has been considered and after verification of all documents, license has also been granted in favour of the eighth respondent.
4.In view of the fact that the license has been granted in favour of the 3/5
eighth respondent, the prayer sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved, it is always open to him to challenge the license issued to the eighth respondent. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(J.N.B.,J.) (S.S.Y.,J.) 01.04.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ta To 1.The District Collector, 2.The Sub Collector, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli.
3.The Thasildar, Ambasamudram Taluk Office, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli.
4.The Commissioner, Department of Geology and Mining, Guindy, Chennai - 600032.
5.The Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mining, Collectorate, Tirunelveli District.
4/5
J. NISHA BANU,J.
and S.SRIMATHY.J ta 01.04.2025 5/5