V.Nimal Anand v. The Director
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17-03-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD).Nos.5945 and 5946 of 2026 V.Nimal Anand ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Director, The Department of Geology and Mining, Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2. The state Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Represented by its Secretary, 3rd Floor, Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.
3. The District Collector, The Collectorate, Tirunelveli District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No. 51/Kanimam-2/2024-8 dated 25.10.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent 1/6
and quash the same as illegal and pass such further or other orders as this Honble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice For Petitioner : Mr.O.R.Gokul Abimanyu For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 25.10.2024.
2. Heard Mr.O.R.Gokul Abimanyu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for R1 and R2 and Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel, who takes notice for R3.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue is covered by the order of this court in a batch of writ petitions in the case of Mathavakannan and others vs. The State of Tamil Nadu. Rep., by its Secretary to Government, Industries Department, Chennai, (W.P.No.33079 of 2024 and etc., batch). Since the said matter is now 2/6
sub judice before the Hon'ble Division Bench, further consideration of this case may be made subject to the outcome of the writ appeal.
4. However, when the matter came up for hearing today, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that, in view of the earlier order granting limited relief with respect to the seigniorage fee and rejecting relief on certain other grounds, the respondent authorities had undertaken the exercise afresh and passed a fresh order dated 10.09.2025. In light of the said order, which supersedes the earlier order dated 25.10.2024, the present writ petition need not be entertained.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the prayer in the writ petition itself can be amended.
6. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case. 3/6
7. It can be seen that the entire exercise has been redone and a detailed order has been passed by the respondents.
8. In view thereof, giving liberty to the petitioner to take such steps to ventilate his grievances as against the order dated 10.09.2025, the present writ petition stands disposed of. A copy of the said order dated 10.09.2025 has also been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.03.2026 Index: Yes Speaking Order: Yes rgm 4/6
To
1. The Director, The Department of Geology and Mining, Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2. The state Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Represented by its Secretary, 3rd Floor, Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.
3. The District Collector, The Collectorate, Tirunelveli District.
5/6
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
rgm and W.M.P(MD).Nos.5945 and 5946 of 2026 17.03.2026 6/6