Disposed

N.Shankar v. the District Collector

Madras HC3 Mar 2015WP(MD)/2040/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus for issuance of transport permits for quarrying operations, the petitioner had already applied with fees. The court directed the second respondent to consider the pending application and pass orders on merits within three weeks, subsequently closing the connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 25.08.2014 and pass orders on merits within three weeks.

N.Shankar Vs the District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.03.2015

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU Writ Petition (MD) No.2040 of 2015 and MP(MD)No. 1 of 2015

N.Shankar

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶10

2.The Deputy Director, Geology and Mining Department, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶11

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue transport permit to the petitioner whenever it is required all along during the period of lease that is up to 2019 for the quarrying operation in Survey Nos.30/2, 31/1, 31/2 and 32/4 of Nalli Village, Sattur Taluk, Virudhunagar District and to pass such other and further or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.S.Kumar,

¶14

Additional Government Pleader.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the respondents to issue transport permit to the petitioner whenever it is required all along during the period of lease that is up to 2019 for the quarrying operation in Survey Nos.30/2, 31/1, 31/2 and 32/4 of Nalli Village, Sattur Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶17

2.It is seen that the petitioner has made an application on 25.08.2014 before the second respondent seeking for transport permit. It is further stated that necessary fees towards grant of such permit has already been paid. Therefore, it is stated that the second respondent has to pass necessary orders.

¶18

3.Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the second respondent will consider the application and pass appropriate orders within the time stipulated by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

¶20

4.Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of only with a direction to the second respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 25.08.2014 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015 is closed.

Sd/

Assistant Registrar

/True copy/

sub Assistant Registrar(c.s)

¶25

¶26

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶27

2.The Deputy Director, Geology and Mining Department, Virudhunagar District.

¶28

+1cc to M/S.C.M.ARUMUGAM, Advocate in SR.No. 9913

¶29

+1cc to Special Government Pleader in SR.No 10242

¶30

TS/12.03.2015/2P-5C

¶31

Writ Petition (MD) No.2040 of 2015

¶32

03.03.2015

¶33

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

N.Shankar v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Shankar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.S. Dhinakaran Vs the Registrar

M. Shanmuga Sundaram Vs the Metropolitan Transport

S. Kansasamy, Vs the Tahsildar

M.Marimuthu Vs the Secretary

T. Murugananthan, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Raja, S/O. Velukonar, Vs the Commissioner of Pudukottai