Dismissed

Thavamuniyasamy.a v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC14 Jun 2021WP(MD)/10060/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed a writ petition seeking release of a seized lorry. The Court held that the petitioner had the appropriate remedy in the designated Court under the Mines and Minerals Act and ordered the writ petition be closed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is closed, giving liberty to the petitioner to file and work out the remedy before the jurisdictional designated Court.

Thavamuniyasamy.a Vs the Revenue Divisional… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.[MD]No.10060 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.06.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI W.P.[MD]No.10060 of 2021

A.Thavamuniyasamy

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

¶8

2.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department, Thoothukudi District.

¶9

3.The Inspector of Police, Puthiyamputhur Police Station, Thoothukudi District. : Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to release the petitioner's Tipper Lorry bearing registration No.TN 69 AY 9050, Engine No.TBE150484Z Chasis No.MB1G3DYC6BETF5678, seized by the third respondent police in Crime No.71 of 2021.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Rajiv Rufus For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran Standing Counsel for Government

¶12

**O R D E R ************

¶13

[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. ]

¶14

The petitioner, who is claiming to be the owner of the vehicle, seeks release of the same by filing the writ petition.

¶15

2.We have already held that remedy open to the petitioner is to approach the jurisdictional designated Court and not to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. This is also for the reason that power of confiscation is available to the designated Court. Though an First Information Report has been registered, the offence involved would include Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code and 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development

¶16

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

¶17

1/2

¶18

W.P.[MD]No.10060 of 2021

¶19

and Regulation) Act, 1957. Such a situation has already been taken note of by way of a clarification by us indicating the procedure to be followed. Thus, the present writ petition stands closed giving liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law in tune with the order of the Division Bench. In the event of filing a petition before the jurisdictional designated Court, the said Court is expected to dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such an application. No costs.

¶20

// True Copy //

¶21

¶22

Note In view of the present lock down : owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶23

To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

¶24

2.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department, Thoothukudi District.

¶25

3.The Inspector of Police, Puthiyamputhur Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

¶26

+1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-19425[F] dated 16/06/2021 )

¶27

ORDER MADE IN W.P.[MD]No.10060 of 2021 14.06.2021

¶28

KM(21.06.2021) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶29

2/2

Thavamuniyasamy.a v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thavamuniyasamy.a v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

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

Venkatesan.R Vs State of Tamilnadu

Gunasekaran Ponmani Vs the District Collector

Sundaravel.a.M Vs the Principal Secretary

The Management Vs K.K.Rajan

The State of Tamilnadu Vs the Correspondnet

Perumalraj.R Vs the Authorized Officer