Esakkimuthu v. the Assistant Director
Case brief
What is this about?
This Court dismissed a writ petition seeking release of a seized tractor-trailer, holding that the petitioner must approach the designated Court as the impugned order involved Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals Act. The writ was closed with liberty to approach the designated Court.
What did the court decide?
Writ Petition closed; liberty given to work out remedy before the jurisdictional designated Court.
What the court decided
W.P(MD)No.13855 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P(MD)No.13855 of 2021
Esakkimuthu ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Assistant Director, Geology and Mining, Tuticorin,
Tuticorin District.
- 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchendur,
Tuticorin District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Srivaikundam Police Station, Tuticorin District. ... Respondents
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition claiming release of a seized vehicle during mining offense proceedings is maintainable before the High Court or the designated Court.
What remedy is available to the petitioner regarding the confiscation of his vehicle under Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals Act.
What direction is issued regarding the time limit for disposal of the petition by the designated Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Esakkimuthu
- respondent
The Assistant Director, Geology and Mining, Tuticorin
- respondent
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchendur
- respondent
The Inspector of Police, Srivaikundam Police Station
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court