Allowed

K.Sadasivam v. The District Collector

Madras HC12 Sept 2019WP/27172/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition urging action against illegal gravel removal and tree uprooting from a public pond mislabeled as desilting. Court directed the Block Development Officer to inspect the site after putting the third respondent on notice and instructed the District Collector to remove exotic weeds.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to cause inspection of the water body after notice to the 3rd respondent and to take action within eight weeks; ordered the 1st respondent to remove exotic weeds.

K.Sadasivam Vs The District Collector — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 12.09.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶6

WP.No.27172/2019 & WMP.No.26568/2019

¶7

K.Sadasivam

¶8

..Petitioner

¶9

Versus
1.The District Collector
Coimbatore District
Coimbatore 641018.
2.The Block Development Officer
Sultanpet Panchayat Union
Sultanpet, Sulur Taluk,
Coimbatore District.
3.R.Arunkumar ..Respondents

¶10

Prayer:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the 3^rd respondent and others who are indulged in illegal removing and transporting the gravels excavated from the public pond which is situated in SF.No.298, Malaipalayam Village, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District for commercial motive by considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2019.

¶11

For Petitioner :Mr.N.Manoharan For RR1&2 :Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Spl.GP

¶12

ORDER

¶13

[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,]

¶14

(1)By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2.

¶15

(2)The grievance expressed by the petitioner who claims to be a Public Interest Litigant, is that the 3^rd respondent, who is an Ex-Counsellor, under the garb of de-silting the water body, has started removing gravels and exploiting it for commercial

¶16

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

¶17

purpose and also uprooting the valuable trees.

¶18

(3)Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and also perused the materials placed before it including the photographs which are made available in pages No.17 and 18 of the typed set of documents.

¶19

(4)Admittedly, the Public Works [W2] Department, vide G.O.Ms.No.58 dated 13.06.2019, had accorded administrative sanction for 1829 ''Kudimaramath Works'' in 29 Districts at an estimated cost of Rs.499.688 Crores for the year 2019-2020 and one of the water bodies identified is the water body in question. The petitioner, in this regard, has submitted a representation dated 06.09.2019 to the 1^st respondent.

¶20

(5)This Court, taking into consideration, the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the writ petitioner, either in his representation or in this writ petition, directs the 2^nd respondent to cause inspection of the water body/tank located in Survey No.398, Malaipalayam Village, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District, after putting the 3^rd respondent on notice and if any infraction is noted in the form of illegal/unauthorised quarrying/violations of the conditions of the licence, appropriate action in accordance with law, shall be taken and the entire exercise is to be carried out within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

(6)It is to be remembered at this juncture that the Full Bench of this Court, vide order dated 28.07.2017 in WP.No.10614/2017 etc., batch, has also directed the concerned authorities to remove Prosopis juliflora [Seemai Karuvelam] trees from the water bodies and despite a lapse of very many years, no effective steps have been taken to remove the exotic weeds from the water bodies. It is the high time that the Collector of Coimbatore District, viz., the 1^st respondent herein, shall take immediate and effective steps to remove the exotic growth of weeds from the water bodies.

¶22

(7)The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶23

¶24

Assistant Registrar(J)

¶25

True Copy

¶26

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶27

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

¶28

¶29

¶30

1.The District Collector Coimbatore District Coimbatore 641018.

¶31

2.The Block Development Officer Sultanpet Panchayat Union Sultanpet, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District.

¶32

+1 CC to The Govt. Pleader sr 78936. +1 CC to Mr.N.Manoharan, Advocate sr 78635.

¶33

WP.No.27172/2019
SP(26/09/2019)

¶34

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

K.Sadasivam v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Sadasivam 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Deepashri Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Biju Kumar, Vs Secretary to Government

Sarojinidevi Vs The Union of India

Rajaravindran, Vs The District Collector

P.Narayanasamy Vs the Chief Engineer

S.Muthukumar Vs The Chief Secretary