Madras High CourtCONT P(MD)/503/2016closed

Vaigai Sand Lorry Owners v. Thiru.Veera Ragava Rao,

2016-04-29Honourable Mr Justice S. Manikumar,Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.04.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Contempt Petition (MD) No.503 of 2016 Vaigai Sand Lorry Owners Association, Rep. By its Secretary C.Ramachandran ..

Petitioner versus 1.Thiru. Veera Ragava Rao, District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.Thiru.Atul Anand, Commissioner, Department of Mines and Miknerals, Thiru.V.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 32.

3.Thiru.Naina Mohammed, Assistant Director, Department of Mines and Minerals, Collectorate, Madurai.

.. Respondents Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt Act, to punish the contemnors/respondents for their willful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 11.02.2015 in W.P.(MD) No.17520 of 2013. Prayer in WP(MD). 17520/ 2013 : To direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.6.2013. For petitioner :

Mr.V.Karthikeyan For respondents :

Mr.S.Kumar, A.G.P.

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.MANIKUMAR, J.) Vide order dated 11.02.2015 in W.P.(MD) No.17520 of 2013, Writ Court directed the respondents herein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 11.06.2013. 2.Averments made in para 3 of the supporting affidavit to this contempt petition makes it clear that action has been taken on the representation of the petitioner dated 11.06.2013 and that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

District Collector, Madurai has sent a reply. Despite the same, averments have been made that no action has been taken. 3.At that time, when the contempt application is heard, inviting the attention of this Court to the proceedings dated 09.04.2015 in Na.Ka.No.416/2013/mines of the District Collector, Madurai, Mr.S.Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that representation has been considered, a committee has been constituted and directions have been issued and that therefore, the allegations that no action has been taken, have to be rejected. Supporting the same, he has also produced a copy of the said proceedings.

4.We have perused the same. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Government Pleader, the District Collector, Madurai has considered the representation and passed appropriate orders. From the perusal of the order made in W.P.(MD) No.17520 of 2013 dated11.02.2015, there is nothing on record to indicate as to how the representation dated 11.06.2013 of the petitioner has to be considered. It is a simple direction. The Collector has considered the representation and passed a detailed order. Absolutely, there is no appropriate materials in the averments made in the contempt petition.

5.Accordingly, this contempt petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Vacation Officer/ Assistant Registrar /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.Thiru. Veera Ragava Rao, District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.Thiru.Atul Anand, Commissioner, Department of Mines and Miknerals, Thiru.V.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 32. 3.Thiru.Naina Mohammed, Assistant Director, Department of Mines and Minerals, Collectorate, Madurai.

+1 CC to Mr.V.PERUMAL, Advocate, SR No.25402 +1 CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR No.25768 Contempt Petition (MD) No.503 of 2016 29.04.2016 Arul SH/SKS-RR/SAR-II:02.06.2016:2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/