Disposed

A.Devendran, v. the District Collector

Madras HC22 Jan 2013WP(MD)/1110/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a stay on illegal sand mining. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, affording due process to all relevant parties, and ordered completion of proceedings within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioner's representation, serve notice on alleged offenders, and pass orders on merits within 12 weeks.

A.Devendran, Vs the District Collector — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 22.01.2013

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DEVADASS

¶6

Writ Petition (MD) No.1110 of 2013 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2013

¶7

A.Devendran ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

¶10

2.The Tahsildar,

¶11

Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶12

3.The District Engineer, South Vellaru Division,

¶13

Water Resource Organization, Public Works Department, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents

¶14

Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to stop the illegal mining of sand from the Government land in Survey Numbers 76, 77, 78 of Mumbalai Village, Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy

¶16

For Respondent : Mr.M.Govindan Special Government Pleader

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

(Order of the Court was made by K.N.BASHA and P.DEVADASS, JJ )

¶19

The petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition seeking to issue a direction, directing the Respondents to stop the illegal mining of sand from the Government land in Survey Numbers 76, 77, 78 of Mumbalai Village, Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶20

Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By mutual consent, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the time of admission itself.

¶21

Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy, learned counsel for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner would submit that in the subject survey numbers number of people are carrying out illegal mining operation in sand. Inspite of the representation of the petitioner dated 08.11.2012, no action was

¶22

¶23

taken by the respondents. As such, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court with the present Writ Petition.

¶24

Heard Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶25

We have carefully considered the submissions made on both

¶26

sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶27

Though the petitioner has come forward with a larger prayer, it is pertinent to note that the petitioner has already preferred a representation to the respondents and it is suffice to give direction to the competent authority to consider such representation.

¶28

In view of the same, this Court without going into the merits of the representation of the petitioner dated 08.11.2012, constrained to direct the respondents 1 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 08.11.2012, by affording opportunity to the petitioner as well as to the other relevant parties, particularly the persons, who are alleged to have been carrying on illegal mining in sand by serving notice to them and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

¶29

The petitioner is also directed to submit a fresh copy of the representation dated 08.11.2012, to the respondents 1 and 3 within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of receiving such fresh copy of the representation dated 08.11.2012 from the petitioner, the respondents 1 and 3 herein shall complete the above said exercise within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the representation from the petitioner.

¶30

With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2013 is closed. Sd/-

Deputy Registrar(LA)

/True Copy/

Assistant Registrar

To:

1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

¶36

2.The Tahsildar, Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶37

3.The District Engineer, South Vellaru Division, Water Resource Organization, Public Works Department, Pudukkottai District.

¶38

+1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.NO.2961)

¶39

Writ Petition (MD) No.1110 of 2013 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2013 22.01.2013

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶41

¶42

NSV/4.2.13/2P/5C

A.Devendran, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Devendran, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Sasi, Vs the District Collector

Seetharaman, Vs the District Collector

S. Santha, Vs the Chief Executive Engineer

The President Vs Baskaran

S. Murugan, Vs the District Collector

M.Johnson, Vs the District Collector