Vellaisamy v. The Secretary To Government
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P(MD)Nos.19241 & 19242 of 2022 Vellaisamy ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Geology and Mining, Guindy, Chennai-32.
3.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Virudhunagar Distrcit.
5.The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Virudhunagar District, Virrdhunagar.
1/5
6.The Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
7.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.
8.The Inspector of Police, Aviyur Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
9.Sivabalan 10.Boominathan
...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take effective steps to prevent the illegal sand Mining from the lands comprised in Sand Mining taking in Survey 71/4, 82/1, 82/5, 72/2B, 71/3, 72/3, 82/2, 72/1A, 72/4, 72/2A, 156, 5/1, 57/4, 57/5, 7/6, 65, 66, 70/2, 58, 59, 63 & 64 situated at Nasarpuliyankulam Village, kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District without got permission by considering the petitioner's representation dated 11.10.2022. For Petitioner :Mr.C.Suresh Kannan For R1 to R6 :Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Govt. Pleader For R7 & R8 :Mr.P.Kottaichamy Government Advocate For R10 :Mr.T.Palanisamy For R9 : No appearance 2/5
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a mandamus seeking to conduct an enquiry as against the 10th respondent that he is conducting illegal quarry in the adjacent lands.
2. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner came to know through the counter affidavit that the 10th respondent was provided with license by the authorities concerned by conducting red sand quarry in the survey Nos.71/4, 82/1, 82/5, 72/2B, 71/3, 72/3, 82/2, 72/1A, 72/4, 72/2A, 156, 5/1, 57/4, 57/5, 7/6, 65, 66, 70/2, 58, 59, 63 & 64. The learned counsel for the petitioner still insisting that by using this licence, the 10th respondent has conducted the quarry beyond the permitted area.
3. This Court considered the rival submissions made.
4. The petitioner has filed this writ petition without even ascertaining whether the official respondents have granted any quarry licence in favour of the 10th respondent and now, making an allegation 3/5
that the 10th respondent conducting quarry beyond the permitted area. The petitioner has not substantiated his case. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
NCC : Yes / No.
Index : Yes / No.
15.09.2023 Internet:Yes am To 1.The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Geology and Mining, Guindy, Chennai-32.
3.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar Distrcit.
5.The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Virudhunagar District, Virrdhunagar.
6.The Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
7.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.
8.The Inspector of Police, Aviyur Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
4/5
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
am Order made in 15.09.2023 5/5