Dismissed

Vinoth v. the District Collector

Madras HC5 Jan 2022WP(MD)/84/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking release of seized lorry and JCB vehicle. The Court, following a prior Division Bench order, directed the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional designated court instead and closed the present writ petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional designated Court for disposal on merits within two weeks.

Vinoth Vs the District Collector — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.84 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.01.2022 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN W.P(MD)No.84 of 2022

¶4

Vinoth

¶5

... Petitioner

¶6

1.The District Collector, Collector Office,

¶7

Sivagangai District – 630 562.

¶8

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, RDO Office,

¶9

Sivagangai District – 630 561.

¶10

3.The Assistant Director,

¶11

Geology and Mining, Collector Office,

¶12

Sivagangai District – 630 562.

¶13

4.The Inspector of Police, Sipcot Police Station, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District – 630 606. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to release the Petitioner's Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-63-AB-8259 with JCB vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-20-CF-4719 from the custody of the 4^th Respondent as per the earlier order of this Hon'ble Court of Division Bench Order in W.P.(MD) No.12285 of 2021, dated 22.07.2021, on the basis of the petitioner's Representation dated 20.12.2021, within a stipulated time may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senthilkumar For Respondents : Mr.P.Thilakkumar Government Pleader

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(Order of the Court was made by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J. )

¶18

The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the respondents herein to release the Petitioner's Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-63-AB-8259 with JCB vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-20-CF-4719 from the custody of the 4^th Respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

1/3

¶20

W.P(MD)No.84 of 2022

¶21

Heard Mr.R.Senthilkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Thilakkumar, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶22

An identical issue has been considered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P(MD)No.3998 of 2021 (M.Subbaiah vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Virudhunagar District) and this Court has closed the Writ Petition, giving liberty to the petitioner to work out the remedy in the manner known to law. Relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder:

¶23

“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 FIR has been registered, the offence involved would include Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals Act. 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.”

¶24

In tune with the order of the Division Bench, if the petitioner files a petition before the jurisdictional designated Court, such Court shall dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such application.

¶25

In the light of the above order, the writ petition stands disposed of with similar observations made in W.P(MD).No.3998 of 2021. No costs.

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

¶28

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

¶29

2/3

¶30

W.P(MD)No.84 of 2022

¶31

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.

¶32

To: 1.The District Collector, Collector Office, Sivagangai District – 630 562. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, RDO Office, Sivagangai District – 630 561. 3.The Assistant Director, Geology and Mining, Collector Office, Sivagangai District – 630 562. 4.The Inspector of Police, Sipcot Police Station, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District – 630 606. +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-588[F] dated 06/01/2022 ) W.P(MD)No.84 of 2022 05.01.2022 SR (CO) GC(12.01.2022) 3P 6C

¶33

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

¶34

3/3

Vinoth v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinoth 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

J.Prakash Pandian Vs The District Collector

The Management, Vs the Presiding Officer

Mathivanan. P Vs The Secretary to Govt.

Radha Vs the District Collector

Syed Babu Cm Vs the Chief Election Commissioner

Rajanikanth Vs the Manager (Technical)