The petitioner challenged the demand to produce his JCB machine by the Inspector of Police. However, the State counsel confirmed that no insistence for production or personal appearance had occurred, resulting in the dismissal of the writ petition without needing a mandatory order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:14/09/2011 C O R A M
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR
W.P.(MD).No.10412 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2011
Ramalingam ... Petitioner
Vs.
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from insisting for the produce of the petitioner JCB machine without following the due process of law under the Mines and Minerals Rules.
For petitioner : Mr.M.Thirunavukarasu For Respondents : Mr.B.Pugalenthi Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
According to the petitioner, he is a Contractor and owner of JCB machine. On 05.09.2011, the Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, Ramanthapuram District, called upon the petitioner over phone and directed him to produce JCB machine, attached to a vehicle.
2. It is the further case of the petitioner that on the complaint of the Village Administrative Officer, Karisalkulam Village, a case has been registered in Crime No. 26 of 2011, punishable under Sections 353, 379, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 21(1) of Mines and Mineral Development Regulation Act 1957, alleging that 20 loads sands were stealthily removed. According to the petitioner, he is in noway connected with the accused and the tipper lorry bearing registration No. TN 65 B-9565, referred to in Crime No. 26 of 2011 stated supra. Nevertheless, the second respondent, on an assumption that JCB machine with catalogue No. JS 210 D-4A, was involved in the crime, has directed the petitioner to produce the same.
3. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition for a Mandamus directing the respondents from insisting for the produce of the petitioner JCB machine, contending inter alia that if at all, there is any https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ contravention or violation of the Mines and Minerals Development
2
Regulation Act 1957 or the Tamil Nadu Miner Mineral Concession Rules 1959, it is for the Revenue Divisional Officer, to initiate any enquiry and in the absence any proceedings, taken by him against the petitioner, the Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, has no jurisdiction or authority to insist for production of machine. For the abovesaid reasons, he prayed for issuance of Mandamus.
4. On instructions, from the Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, the second respondent herein, Mr.B.Pugalenthi, learned Special Government Pleader, submitted that no crime has been registered against the petitioner and that no summon has been issued for his appearance or production of the machine. In such circumstances, he submitted that it is only on apprehension, a Writ Petition has been filed and for the abovesaid reasons, prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition. The submission of the learned counsel is placed on record.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.
6. Inasmuch as, the State counsel has come forward to contend that neither the personal appearance nor production of the JCB machine, was insisted by the Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, the second respondent herein, there is no need to issue any Writ of Mandamus.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. No costs.
vsg Sd/-
Assistant Registrar[AE]
/True copy/
To
Sub Assistant Registrar
W.P.(MD).No.10412 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 Dated:14.09.2011
2P/4C RPB 26.09.2011
Ramalingam
The Revenue Divisional Officer Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District
The Inspector of Police Kovilankulam Police Station Ramanathapuram District
S. Manikumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
