Disposed

M.R.Mani, v. The District Collector

Madras HC5 Dec 2017WP/16943/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that since a statutory appeal lies before the Director of Geology & Mining under Rule 36-C, the writ petition questioning the quarry lease was not maintainable. The petition was disposed of without merits evaluation, granting liberty to prefer an appeal within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without examining merits; liberty granted to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within two weeks.

M.R.Mani, Vs The District Collector — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.12.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.No.16943 of 2017

¶2

and WMP.Nos.18399 to 18401 of 2017

¶3

M.R.Mani

¶4

son of Rakkiya Goundar ... Petitioner

¶5

versus 1. The District Collector District Collectorate Tirupur District.

¶6

The Sub Collector Tirupur Tirupur District.

¶7

The Assistant Director Department of Geology and Mining Tirupur District.

¶8

The Tahsildar Uthukkuli Taluk Office Uthukkuli, Tirupur District.

¶9

The Joint Chief Controller of Explosives Ministry of Commerce and Industry Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO) Government of India A & D Wing, Block 1 - 8, 2nd Floor, Shastri Bhavan 26, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006. 6. M.R.Viswanathan Son of Rakkiya Gounder ...Respondents

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed in Na.Ka.585/Kanimam/2013 dated 13.01.2016 on the file of 1st respondent and to quash the same.

¶11

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

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C.E.Pratap For Respondents: Mr.P.Senthilvel, Government Advocate for R1 to R4 Mr.T.V.Krishnamachari Senior Panel Counsel, for R5 Mr.C.Prakasam for R6

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner is aggrieved against the order passed by the first respondent - District Collector dated 13.01.2016, granting lease to quarry in favour of the sixth respondent in respect of subject matter quarry.

¶15

According to the petitioner, as contended in this writ petition, granting of such quarry lease in favour of the sixth respondent is in violation of Rules and against the interest of the public. Admittedly, as against the order passed by the first respondent, a statutory appeal lies before the Director of Geology & Mining, under Rule 36-C of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. Therefore, the petitioner should have filed such appeal before the said statutory appellate authority, as the said official being the appellate authority can go into the facts and decide the dispute since he is also a fact finding authority. Without doing so, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. Hence, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits and contentions raised by the respective parties in respect of the lease granted in favour of the sixth respondent, as it is for the petitioner to agitate all these contentions before the Appellate Authority.

¶16

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, without expressing any view on the merits of the matter, only by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any such appeal is filed, the Appellate Authority will consider the said appeal and decide the same on its own merits and in accordance with law, after hearing all the parties concerned. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶18

//True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

¶21

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

¶22

To 1. The District Collector District Collectorate Tirupur District.

¶23

1. The Sub Collector Tirupur Tirupur District.

¶24

The Assistant Director
Department of Geology and Mining
Tirupur District.
4. The Tahsildar
Uthukkuli Taluk Office
Uthukkuli, Tirupur District.
5. The Joint Chief Controller of Explosives
Ministry of Commerce and Industry
Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO)
Government of India
A & D Wing, Block 1 - 8, 2nd Floor, Shastri Bhavan
26, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai-600 006.

¶25

+1 cc to M/s.C.E.Pratap Advocate sr 86145
+1 cc to M/s.C.Prakasam Advocate sr 86251
+1 cc to M/s.T.V.Krishnamachari Advocate sr 85791
+1 cc to Govt Pleader sr 86885
W.P.No.16943 of 2017
nri(co)
aa21/12/2017

¶26

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

M.R.Mani, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.R.Mani, 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

B.Sudhakar, Vs The Revenue Divisional

P.Chakarapani, Vs The Presiding Officer

A.Jayapal, S/o.M.Anjaan, Vs The Registrar of Cooperative

M/s.Mech Tech Projects, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

M.Sakthivel, Vs The Commissioner of Police

M.Chandru, S/o.Maya, Vs The General Manager