Disposed

K.R. Desingu Raja v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC19 Jul 2017WP(MD)/11628/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench disposed of a writ petition seeking a quarrying license for limestone in the petitioner's lands. Upon learning from the Government Advocate that the petitioner was deceased, the Court dismissed the petition, noting it is open to legal heirs to approach later.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition disposed of leaving it open for legal heirs. No costs.

K.R. Desingu Raja Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.07.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶3

W.P(MD) No.11628 of 2015 and W.M.P.(MD) No.8933 of 2016

K.R.Desingu Raja

... Petitioner

-vs-

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Industries Department, Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶8

The Commissioner, Geology and Mines Department, Guindy, Chennai.

¶9

The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department,

¶10

Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings in Lr.No.11177/MM4/2008 dated 01.12.2011 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the 2nd respondent to grant license for quarrying lime stones in the petitioner's lands situated at S.No.24/2 to an extent of 0.81.0 Hectares in Panthapuli Village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶12

( prayer amended as per the order of this Court dated 01.02.2017 in WMP(MD)No. 8934/2016)

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar

¶14

For M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah Govt. Advocate

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This Writ Petition has been filed, seeking to call for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings in Lr.No.11177/MM4/2008 dated 01.12.2011 and

¶17

¶18

quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to grant license for quarrying lime stones in the petitioner's lands situated at S.No.24/2 to an extent of 0.81.0 Hectares in Panthapuli Village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶19

When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has submitted that the petitioner had earlier given representations, which were rejected by the authorities twice and further, the petitioner is also no more now.

¶20

In view of the above submission, this petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the legal heirs of the petitioner to take further recourse in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(crl side)

¶23

/True Copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

To:

¶26

The Commissioner and Secretary to Government, of Tamil Nadu, Industries Department, Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶27

The Commissioner,

¶28

Geology and Mines Department, Guindy, Chennai.

¶29

The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

¶30

+1cc to M/s.Ajmal Associates, Sr.No.66531

¶31

+1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No.66974

¶32

AR/RM

¶33

VB/JC/SAR3/01/08/2017/2P/6C

¶34

W.P(MD) No.11628 of 2015

¶35

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

¶36

19.07.2017

K.R. Desingu Raja v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R. Desingu Raja v. the State of Tamilnadu

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

A.Ramachindir Vs State Rep by Its

Bakyalakshmi Vs P.Rajammal

S. Devi Meena Vs Thangamani, F/68 Yrs.

M.C.D.A Rajan Vs the District Collector

M.Vaiyapuri Vs the District Collector

Sunoliya Jeraldin, Vs the Commissioner