Partly allowed

K.Subbarayan v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC2 Mar 2021WP/2598/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 complaining about large-scale sand theft in water bodies of Erode District. The Court, without examining merits, directed the District Collector to consider the representation and dispose of it via a speaking order within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Collector to consider the representation dated 21.11.2020 and dispose of it by a speaking order within eight weeks.

K.Subbarayan Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 02.03.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶5

W.P.No.2598 of 2021

¶6

K.Subbarayan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Chief Secretary
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.
2. The District Collector
District Collector Office
Erode District.
3. The Deputy Director
Department of Geology and Mining
Erode District.
4. The Tahsildar
Nambiyur Taluk Office
Nambiyur Taluk, Erode District. ... Respondents
Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to
consider the representations dated 02.09.2020 and 21.11.2020 and
further direct the respondents to save waterbodies and take
criminal actions against persons who illegally involved and
taken away sands, clay, silt, savudu and gravel from lakes and
ponds of Nambiyur Taluk, Erode District.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Prabhakaran For Respondents : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan State Govt. Pleader for respondents 1, 2 & 4

¶8

Mr.E.Manoharan Spl. Govt. Pleader for respondent-3

¶9

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

¶10

ORDER

¶11

(Made by SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J)

¶12

The petitioner is a Member of Parliament from Tirupur Lok Sabha Constituency. He complains about the large scale sand theft in various waterbodies of Erode District.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the multiple representations that were submitted by the petitioner to the District Collector and the complete inaction in response thereto. He also refers to the photographs included in the typed set of papers to demonstrate the consequence of such illegal quarrying activities and the depletion of water from the ponds and lakes as a result thereof.

¶14

Learned State Government Pleader submits that the representations of the petitioner would be considered and disposed of, if a reasonable time is specified for the same.

¶15

Accordingly, without examining the merits of such representations, the District Collector of Erode District is directed to consider the representation dated 21.11.2020 of the petitioner and dispose of the same by a speaking order, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt a copy of this order, after providing a reasonable opportunity to all the parties likely to be affected.

¶16

W.P.No.2598 of 2021 is disposed of on the above terms. There will be no order as to costs. WMP No.2932 of 2021 is closed.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶18

//True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

kpl

¶21

¶22

The Chief Secretary Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

¶23

The District Collector District Collector Office Erode District.

¶24

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

¶25

The Deputy Director Department of Geology and Mining Erode District.

¶26

The Tahsildar Nambiyur Taluk Office Nambiyur Taluk, Erode District.

¶27

+1cc to Mr.D.Veerasekaran, Advocate SR.13085 +1cc to the Government Pleader SR.13142

¶28

W.P.No.2598 of 2021

¶29

GJ(CO) CB(17/03/2021)

¶30

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

K.Subbarayan v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Subbarayan 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

The State of Tamilnadu Vs B.Deepankumar

S.Thyagavalli Vs Authorized Officer

M.Natarajan Vs The District Collector

G.Srinivasan B. E (Elecl ) Llb, Vs Union of India

The Secretary to Government Vs K Sundararajan

Traffic Dr.K.R.Ramaswamy Vs The chief secretary