Disposed

Arockia Richard.P v. the Dist Collector

Madras HC9 Jun 2021WP(MD)/4748/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this W.P. filed under Article 226, the Madurai Bench directed the District Revenue Officer to note objections regarding a proposed petrol bunk, conduct a spot inspection, and dispose of the application on merits pending service on the 6th respondent.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Revenue Officer to take note of objections, conduct spot inspection after notice to 6th respondent, and decide the matter on merits.

Arockia Richard.P Vs the Dist Collector — Environment and Pollution | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.[MD]No.4748 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.06.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI W.P.[MD]No.4748 of 2021 and W.MP(MD).No.3861 of 2021

¶4

P.Arockia Richard ... Petitioner Vs.

¶5

1.The District Collector Collectorate, Sivagangai District

¶6

2.District Revenue Officer Devakottai Sivagangai District

¶7

3.Revenue Divisional Officer Sivagangai District

¶8

4.The Tahsildar Karaikudi Taluk Sivagangai District

¶9

5.Mr.Pakkiyaraj

¶10

6.The Zonal Manager Essar Oil Corporation Limited Zonal Office at Chennai House Chennai 600 108 ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4, forbearing issuance of licence on the purpose of petrol bulk at Plots No. C22 & C23 in Suvey No.428/1A Senjaipallivasal, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District by considering the representations dated 02.03.2020 and 09.03.2020 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Joseph Jerry For Respondents 1 to 4 : Mr.A.K.Manickam Standing Counsel for Government For Respondent 5 : Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

1/3

¶14

W.P.[MD]No.4748 of 2021

¶15

ORDER

¶16

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

¶17

We have heard Mr.A.Joseph Jerry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned Standing Counsel for Government appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan, learned counsel appearing for 5^th respondent.

¶18

2.This writ petition filed as a “Public Interest Litigation” prays for a positive direction upon the respondents 1 to 4, forbearing them from issuing any license to the private respondent for running a petrol bunk.

¶19

3.The sixth respondent is yet to be served. The learned standing counsel for Government appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 submitted that the application is under consideration before the second respondent and no orders have been passed.

¶20

4.The apprehension of the petitioner is that the permission may be granted without even taking note of the objections given by the petitioner and others in the representations dated 02.03.2020 and 09.03.2020, wherein they have represented that the petrol bunk should not be located.

¶21

5.In any event, since the matter is now pending before the second respondent, we direct the second respondent to take note of the objections dated 02.03.2021 and 09.03.2021 and conduct a spot inspection, after notice to the sixth respondent and then, proceed to pass order on merits and in accordance with law. This order shall be complied with as and when the application given by the sixth respondent is taken up for consideration by the second respondent.

¶22

6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶23

Assistant Registrar(Records)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

msa/cp

¶27

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

¶28

2/3

¶29

W.P.[MD]No.4748 of 2021

¶30

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.

¶31

¶32

1.The District Collector Collectorate Sivagangai District 2.District Revenue Officer Devakottai Sivagangai District 3.Revenue Divisional Officer Sivagangai District 4.The Tahsildar Karaikudi Taluk Sivagangai District +1 CC to M/s.R.SUNDAR SRINIVASAN, Advocate ( SR-19139[F] dated 10/06/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-19219[F] dated 11/06/2021 )

¶33

ORDER MADE IN W.P.[MD]No.4748 of 2021 and W.MP(MD).No.3861 of 2021 09.06.2021

¶34

KMK(CO) TR(17.06.2021) 3P 7C

¶35

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

¶36

3/3

Arockia Richard.P v. the Dist Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arockia Richard.P v. the Dist Collector

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 Director Vs a. Sakthivelu

The Chief Engineer/Personnel Vs M.Rajadurai

Narkis Parvin Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Mahalakshmi.G Vs the Chief Secretary

Kennady.P Vs the Dist.Collector

Baskaran.T.K Vs the Managing Director