Disposed

Anbazhagam v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC6 Apr 2015WP/34270/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL concerning the inspection of mineral lease areas, the High Court directed respondents to examine the issue and respond to the petitioner's representation within one month regarding the appointment of non-State officers to the Special Team. The writ petition was disposed of as no response had been received.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to examine the issue and send response to the representation within one month.

Anbazhagam Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.04.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶6

W.P.No.34270 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013

¶7

V.Anbazhagan .. Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by Chief Secretary,
Secretariat,
St. George Fort,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Principal Secretary,
Department of Industries,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat,
St. George Fort,
Chennai-600 009.

¶8

3.Beach Mineral Producers Association, Mahadevankulam post, Tisaiyanvilai, Via Tirunelveli District, rep. by its President N.Paul Durai. .. Respondents (Respondent No.3 impleaded as per order in M.P.No.1 of 2014 in W.P.No.34270/2013 dt. 06.04.2015)

¶9

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 04.11.2013 and pass fresh orders on appointing members from the officials of the Geology and Mines Department from other States in India to the Special Team headed by Thiru.Sugandeep Singh Bedi, I.A.S., Secretary to Government, Revenue Department to inspect all the six lease areas of major minerals in Thoothukudi District and all the 71 lease areas of

¶10

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

¶11

major minerals in Tirunelveli, Trichirapalli, Kanyakumari and Madurai District.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kumara Devan For Respondents : Mr.STS.Moorthy Govt. Pleader for R1 and R2

¶13

Mr.S.Rajmakesh for R3

¶14

ORDER

¶15

(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶16

Petitioner filed this Public Interest Litigation way back in the year 2013 seeking substitution of the Committee appointed to inspect the lease areas of major minerals in Thoothukudi, Tiruchirapalli, Tirunelveli, Kanyakumari and Madurai Districts with the officers from Geology and Mines and not belonging to the State of Tamil Nadu. In this behalf, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 04.11.2013.

¶17

Neither the petitioner had the benefit of receiving a response to his representation nor do we know the stand of the respondents before us.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid position, we direct the respondents to examine this issue and send response to the representation of the petitioner dated 04.11.2013 within one month of the receipt of the order.

¶19

The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2013 is closed. Copy of the order be sent to respondent No.2.

¶20

Assistant Registrar

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

bbr

¶23

¶24

1.The Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

¶25

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

¶26

2.The Principal Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

¶27

1 cc to Mr. .S.Kumara Devan,Advocate, SR.No.18845

¶28

1 cc to Government Pleader,Sr.No18978

¶29

1 cc to Mr.S.Rajmakesh ,Advocate, SR.No.19195

¶30

W.P.No.34270 of 2013

¶31

vsn(co) pmk.17.4.2015

¶32

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

Anbazhagam v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anbazhagam v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Jayabalan, Vs The Secretary to Government

S.Murugan Vs Inspector of Panchayat

S.Velayutham Vs The Collector

C. Jebakumar George Vs Union of India

R.Gobika, 300/183 II Floor, Vs the Commissioner of Police

Dr.G.R.Ragunathan Vs the Director of Town & Country